Am I crazy? Or is just about everyone ignoring the most obvious potential cause of mass murder in this country?

The “experts” are focusing on suspects from violent video games to the NRA, from bad nutrition to “systemic” failure, whatever that means. 

“Clearly,” they say, “these young men were very troubled. Why were they not [check one] locked up/denied access to weapons/kept away from rap music?  They were all recognized as mentally ill, and almost all were on, or had been on, psychiatric medications. What went wrong?”

There’s an elephant in this room, one that’s so obvious that it cannot be a simple oversight.

Read the above clause again: “almost all were on, or had been on, psychiatric medications.”

Hello? Investigative reporters? See the common thread here?

Good grief! Are pharmaceutical companies such important advertisers that you can’t possibly name their products as suspects?

The FDA certainly recognizes their dangers. Just about every psych drug’s advertisements include warnings along the lines of, “if you feel like offing yourself while taking this drug, please do let your doctor know.”

The potentially explosive nature of these pharmaceuticals is in fact well known. That includes the increased suicide risk associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRRIs) like Prozac, Zoloft and Paxil -- the most common class of antidepressants.

(Note to investigative reporters: Almost all of these murderers conclude their rampages by committing suicide. See a pattern here? Notice any connection?)

What's more, we mustn't be comforted by the assertion that “so-and-so had stopped taking his meds.” He may well have done so, but reports like this one point out that stopping SRRIs can increase the risk of suicide in children and young adults, while causing a slew of other nasty side effects, including anxiety, agitation, extreme restlessness, depression, mood swings, irritability and aggression.

Hello? Sound like feelings that a mass murderer might experience?

Why is no one talking about this? 

Perhaps it would be helpful to consider what American society did about such problems in the days before psychiatry – days when, not so incidentally, mass murder and crippling depression were largely unknown.

Just think about a few of the possibilities.

• Except for the privileged, people worked long, hard days and came home to clean up, do their chores, eat, and sleep. Yes, even children, until the government stepped in with child labor laws to “protect” them.
  

• Except for the most well (sic) educated, most people believed in God. Their kids learned about the Bible not only in church but in the classroom. They learned that it was wrong to engage in things like ingratitude, sex outside of marriage and coveting others’ goods. They were told that these sins were punishable in this life and, without Christ, in the next. These truths were common knowledge until the government stepped in to “protect” schoolchildren from the Bible.
  

• Except for the hardest hearted, most people understood that they were not personally the center of the universe, and that they should put others ahead of themselves. This kept things civil until the government stepped in proffering all kinds of riches, insisting, “Nonsense – it is all about you!” 

We could go on, noticing that most teens before the advent of psychiatry were treated like little adults rather than adolescents. They had responsibilities, and were not allowed to run wild. And if they did in spite of their parents’ best efforts, they had to face the consequences.  

They were not protected by the law from parental discipline, or from the biblical warning that to “spare the rod [is to] spoil the child.”

They were not wrapped in cotton wads of pharmaceuticals to mute the trials that might otherwise set them on the right path not only today, but for all eternity.  

They were instead beneficiaries of the principles expressed in chapter 12 of the New Testament book of Hebrews: “’My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;  for whom the Lord loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives.’  If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten?  But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.”

Translation: the chastening of the Lord is good for everyone – including young people. If you’re not being disciplined, in fact, you are not His child. 

Consider what that might mean for one’s prospects in this life, and – far more important – for all eternity.

These are not entirely new problems. What is new is how defenseless we have become today, how incapable we are of dealing with them, thanks at least in part to a government and a culture that insist we handle “sensitive” children with kid gloves.

And we may be facing exponentially worse problems in the future, not in spite of but possibly because of the drugs that the psychiatric industry claims are the solution.

What I want to know is why no one is talking about any of this. My suspicions may turn out to be wrong; but I am not wrong about the elephant in the room. 

Why is the most obvious suspect being completely ignored?

Don't bring your Bible to school, children; instead, prepare to spend 40 minutes a day practicing transcendental meditation (TM)! 

This gasp-worthy development is the brainchild of the David Lynch Foundation. Lynch is the man who brought us such uplifting and spiritually healing programs as HBO's "Hotel Room," which tells such stories as these, according to a reviewer: 

"In 'Tricks' set in 1969 Moe Boca brings prositute (sic) Darlene to his room where their tryst is intrupted (sic) by the arrival of Moe's friend Louis where mind games ensue. In 'Getting Rid of Robby' set in 1993, Sasha plots to kill her lover Robert in the most unsusual (sic) of ways within the room. In 'Blackout' set in 1936, Danny brings to the room some Chinese take-out food for his wife Diane where a sudden city-wide blackout makes them reminise (sic) of (sic) their only child who drowned years before."

(Perhaps those 40 minutes would be better spent on spelling and grammar. But get this: the children being taught TM are supposedly getting better grades. Apparently taking care with your spelling is no longer important.)

At any rate, the man who thinks it's a good idea to bring such ghastly stories into your living room is now bringing TM into the classroom. 
 
Brought here by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, TM is a form of mantra meditation, which in Sanskrit means "a sacred utterance, numinous sound, or a syllable, word, phonemes, or group of words believed by some to have psychological and spiritual power. Mantra may or may not be syntactic or have literal meaning; the spiritual value of mantra comes when it is audible, visible, or present in thought." 

That's right -- it's Hinduism, and it's already being taught in our schools -- not to mention in our armed services, prisons, homeless shelters, and to targeted groups from women and Africans to American Indians, thanks at least in part to the efforts of Lynch's foundation.   

What's the harm? 

According to expert Caryl Matrisciana, one of Hinduism's most dangerous messages is that "man is not a sinner only ignorant of his so-called divinity. Lying to oneself that one is without sin and not in need of forgiveness from the only One Who is capable of forgiving sin is indeed an evil message of bondage." 

It's also a lie with eternal consequences for anyone who believes it; there is only one way to heaven, and this is not it. But it's being taught to thousands of American children, with tens of thousands on deck, awaiting your donations to Lynch's foundation. 

That's what they tell us, anyway. But Dr. Jerry Bergman, who with Doug Sharp edited this new book from Leafcutter Press, has personally compiled a list of thousands of scientists who trust the Bible's inspiration and inerrancy from cover to cover -- including the Genesis account of God's creation of the universe and everything in it.

Transformed by the Evidence contains the compelling stories of 28 people who share this confidence in the Bible's accuracy -- many of them scientists representing disciplines from astronomy to zoology. There's something for just about everyone in this collection of essays -- even for feminist atheists, since the editors decided to include my testimony as well.

You'll find the back-cover description in the Everlasting Place bookstore, or you can go straight to Amazon to pick up a copy. 

If you were paying attention in the late ‘90s, you heard a Very Important Person say, over and over again, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

This assertion was a cause for ridicule back then, but today it actually sounds like a profound insight. In 21st century America, we can no longer count on the conventional meaning of even the most basic words.

For instance, these days ”affordable” apparently means “unaffordable," if “the Affordable Care Act” is any indication. “Freedom of choice” has become “freedom to murder.” "Awful” no longer means “inspiring reverential wonder,” but something more along the lines of “hideously unpleasant.” “Egregious” once meant good; now it means bad. Coming from the Latin for “ignorant,” “nice” now means “pleasant” or “agreeable.” And “till death do us part” now means “till something better comes along.”

Funny how that happens, isn’t it?

These days, we often see this phenomenon playing out in the realm of theology (which still means “the study of the nature of God,” thank goodness). Sometimes it’s simply a matter of twisting the contextual meaning of a single word. For example: 

• The common Hebrew word for a 24-hour day, “yom,” now means “vast ages.” For far too many people, this little alteration transforms the Bible from the inspired and inerrant word of God into a book of myths. 
• “Hope” means, to the world, something along the lines of “wishful thinking.” But biblically speaking, it means “trust” or “confident expectation.” So what does it mean when I say that I am looking for our “blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13)? That I sure do wish He would come back but I'm not holding my breath?

• “Fear” used to mean “revere.” Now it means “to be afraid of something unpleasant or dangerous.” So much for the “fear of the Lord” being “the beginning of wisdom” (Psalm 111:10).

• “Jealous” used to mean “fiercely protective.” Today it means envying, coveting, harboring suspicions about someone else. How does that make you feel about a “jealous God” (Exodus 20:5)? It was enough to make that great Bible scholar Oprah Winfrey turn her back on Him in favor of New Age thought; how many others have joined her because of this single slice of ignorance?

• “Love,” in its highest form (Greek “agape”), once meant self-sacrificing, unconditional, unceasing and profound affection.  Today it is mostly reduced to what the Greeks call “eros,” meaning “a deep romantic or sexual attachment to (someone),” or what the Bible calls “lust” – not a good thing. Or it’s used to describe our most superficial feelings for something that gives us pleasure – we “love” ice cream or dogs or a good game of Scrabble. These definitions could certainly impact one’s understanding of “God is love” (1 John 4), couldn't they?

• “All” used to mean “the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing.” Now, to growing numbers of professing Christians, it means “some of each.” Consider how that changes the meaning of a pronouncement like Jesus’ “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me” (John 12:32).  

Here’s the thing. There’s only one way to heaven, and that's through the payment Jesus rendered on the cross for our sin. To avail ourselves of that payment, we need simply to repent of what He calls sin and trust in His payment. That has all kinds of implications for our lives and how we will think, speak, behave and live, of course; but the point here is that we cannot even “repent and trust” if we harbor such grave misunderstandings of language.

In fact, how can we possibly trust a transcendent being whose very words are not trustworthy?  

Yes indeedy, these days it really does depend on what the meaning of the word “is” is. And anyone who wants to spend eternity in heaven with the Lord had best spend some time determining what His word actually says.  

I had a discussion the other day with a very intelligent and thoughtful seeker of truth – a woman who believes in God, but not necessarily the God who has revealed Himself in the Bible.
 
“I just can’t believe He would object to two people loving each other, no matter the gender,” said she – let’s call her Nancy, in a nod to detective extraordinaire Nancy Drew. “If He is love, how could He condemn a loving, committed, monogamous relationship?” 
 
I totally get the question; I asked it myself early on in my Christian walk. In fact, I studied it out years ago, concluding that the Bible undoubtedly condemns sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman; you really have to twist it to come to any other conclusion. 
 
I tried to answer Nancy’s question, drawing upon various scriptural truths to do so, and attempting to explain how such anti-biblical lifestyles (and here I include the “free love” heterosexual lifestyle that my generation pioneered back in the ‘60s) prevent us from even turning to the word of God, let alone accepting and obeying it, and blah blah blah. 
 
I don’t think she was convinced. No surprise there: I was relying on my fuzzy recall of a subject I’d studied in some depth, but long ago. But she was gracious, and said she’d think about it.
 
Fast forward to last night, as I continued an Old Testament study of 1 Kings. Imagine my surprise to encounter a passage that answered Nancy’s question in just ten words – one I’d read a dozen times before without once having an “aha!” moment. 
 
This particular passage cites the Lord’s command to the children of Israel to refrain from intermarrying with other nations, for one very simple reason:
 
“Surely they will turn away your hearts after their gods.” (1 Kings 11:2b)
 
We go on to learn that this is precisely what happened to Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived: He wound up with 700 wives and princesses and 300 concubines, clinging “to these in love.”
 
The modern mind asks how God could object to this behavior, as long as Solomon loved these women.
 
The answer begins in verse 4: “For it was so, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned his heart after other gods: and his heart was not loyal to the Lord his God, as was the heart of his father David.” We learn further that he “did evil in the sight of God,” building for his wives temples to worship “abominations” from Chemosh to Molech. And we learn that this was why the Lord later divided the nation of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms, ultimately leading to many centuries of national dormancy.  
 
There you go: sexual sin, like all the rest, turns our hearts away from the living God. And there are consequences, both temporal and eternal.
 
As Ray Comfort said in his comment on this passage, “Solomon had incredible wisdom and yet lust turned his head from God to women, and then (predictably) to idolatry to accommodate his sin” (The Evidence Bible, p. 456).  
 
In other words, when we give ourselves over to our rebellions of choice, we invariably  design for ourselves a god who approves of them. 
 
This is a devastating problem on so many levels. 
 
For instance, from the viewpoint of this life, most of us know, in our heart of hearts, when we are rebelling against God. After all, He has written His law on our hearts. And until our hearts become too hardened to hear, our consciences nag us relentlessly whenever we break that law; our imaginary gods don’t really fool us. But rather than turning to the true God in repentance, most of us instead try to drown our consciences in alcohol or drugs, or work or hobbies or interests that dominate our thoughts every waking hour.  
 
Bottom line: we harden our hearts by turning to everyone and everything but the living God, and so find no true peace in this life. The only comfort we find is in silencing our consciences. 
 
Worse, we find no forgiveness for our sin, and no salvation – which is why embracing sin and idolatry is eternally tragic. It’s not that the Lord is some sort of cosmic, prudish killjoy; it’s that pursuing sin causes us to turn from Him. And the Bible makes it clear: Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6).  
 
No Jesus, no heaven. And according to the demonstrably true Bible, there’s only one alternative.
 
It’s not that we have to clean up our acts to gain entry into heaven; we cannot. Thankfully, Jesus did it for us; He paid the penalty for our sins on the cross, so that anyone who repents and trusts in His sacrifice is given His righteousness, and will spend eternity in heaven with Him.
 
So here’s the very simple answer I should have given Nancy when she asked how God could object to monogamous marital sex, whatever the genders may be: God objects because “Surely they will turn away your hearts after their gods.”