What is Marxism? An introduction to The Homeschool Garden Morning Time session The Iron Curtain with Linda Lacour Hobar

Listen here:

The Iron Curtain – The Homeschool Garden Morning Time

The Iron Curtain is a 4-week long morning time session that dives into The Iron Curtain, communism, and touches on the results of communism during that era and the effects continuing on today. 

Lara:

Welcome friends today. We are going to be speaking with our friend Linda Lacour Hobar, the author of The Mystery of History on a topic that is so timely and so important. To coordinate with the release of The Iron Curtain session from The Homeschool Garden, we are going to be discussing “What is Marxism?“.

Welcome Mrs. Linda, can you tell us a little bit about yourself?

Linda:

Yes. Hi. Well first thanks for having me and just a little about me. I’m a retired homeschool mom. Now I did homeschool for 17 years, but about halfway through that journey, I started writing The Mystery of History. So I’ve been in the history world for about 20 years now.

Lara:

Oh, that’s wonderful!

So before we really dive into our topic, can you tell us how and when and why you have studied Marxism?

Linda:

Yes. Well, again, since I have been writing world history and I write it chronologically for those that might not be familiar with the program. We go from ancient times to medieval, to the Renaissance to modern. So when we hit modern history in volume four, I certainly could not avoid Marxism, but I’ll say this too. I took this deep dive, I guess it was about 10 years ago now, but you know, I have been monitoring it ever since because I was quickly fascinated. Because I grew up during the cold war, kind of barely understanding it, but now I see it so much more clearly and so much more relevant, even more so now.

And as for why it matters well, you know, freedom as you and I know it, or maybe have known it, in our lifetimes, freedom is really an anomaly in history and it’s actually not the norm.

That’s what history would teach us. And it’s my opinion that some forces throughout history just seem to keep trying to bring socialism back, like even before Karl Marx refined it, because, you know, if you break down the word socialism to the most simple terms, social is about man.

So it’s really man seeking to solve man’s problems by himself. Apart from God. We would also call that humanism human-ism. Yeah. All those “isms” are so important, but you know, man in his sinful state has kind of been at this – at these antics – really since the garden of Eden. But I won’t go that I won’t go that far back today. I promise.

Lara:

You know, I always like to point out that even the pilgrims tried socialism and they couldn’t make it work. I mean, if the pilgrims couldn’t do it (laughter).

I think you have a quick biography for Marx and a brief look at his theory and the Bible. And then a look at the ramifications Marxism. Right? I’ve studied Marxism too, but I know there’s always so much more to learn.

Linda:

Okay. Yes, I will start with the bio, but I don’t want your, your listeners to wander off so I’ll zip through that fast because we do want to get to the juicy stuff, which really is that theory, but it is important to know some background, which is that he was born in 1818. That was in Prussia, which became Germany.

Now, his parents were Jewish. And that’s important to remember because Adolf Hitler, who despised Jews, you know, he would later hate communists. He would assume that they were all Jews like Karl Marx.  Well Marx’s family would eventually join the Lutheran church and he was baptized. They probably joined the church actually to avoid persecution. But anyway, as a young adult, he would claim to be an atheist and that greatly shaped his worldview.

So he studied at the university of Berlin, as you might expect, he was in Germany and it was in Berlin. He was greatly influenced by pretty radical thinkers. People who would debunk politics and religion, you know, university has always seemed to be the place for that. Don’t they? [Yes, definitely.] Yes.

And one of those leaders at that time was Voltaire. He was a leader of the enlightenment and just think about the enlightenment and what it even suggests. Voltaire thought man could fix himself. You know, if men were just more enlightened, if man was just less barbaric, I think progressive still hold those ideals of the enlightenment. And again, we’d also call that humanism.

But anyway, Karl Marx let’s just stay with him. So he eventually went to Paris and that’s where he befriended Friedrich Engels who was a fellow radical and became Marx’s lifelong friend.

And those two men, they really fueled each other and they fueled each other’s ideas for social change. In 1845, they wrote German Ideology.

In 1846 they established the Communist Correspondence Committee.

Then in 1847, that committee merged with another one to become the Communist League. But this is where history happened for those that don’t know it was the Communist League members who said, “Hey, Karl Marx, why don’t you write some things down to really shape our ideology?”

And so he started writing The Communist Manifesto because he was asked to. Now that was published in London in 1848. And it has become the handbook for communist leaders. So we will eventually take that apart, but let me just kind of stay on track with Marx. Are you following me so far?

Lara:

Yes. I knew that he wrote The Communist Manifesto, but I did not know he had written other works with Engels.

Linda:

He did. In fact, there’s even more work I’ll talk about in a second, but yeah. And because he was such a radical, it may be of no surprise that between 1845 and 1849, he was exiled three times for communist views. He was exiled once from Belgium, twice from France.

I think it’s almost funny about France, because think about them at that time. They’re a little jumpy because they were still recovering from Napoleon. So anyway, in his thirties, Karl Marx would eventually move to London, England, and then he spent the rest of his life there. In England, that’s where he demonstrated what I would say were some very unorthodox views toward work and family.

He really didn’t seem to cherish or love either. For example, when it came to marriage, he thought it was outdated. And honestly, Marxists today still are not big fans of biblical marriage and parenting.

They seem to think stands in the way of “progress” and “collectivism”.

And then when it came to work – well for an income, Mark’s depended a lot on his wife’s inheritance and on an allowance that he got from his close friend, Friedrich Engels.

I kind of look at Marx as that guy that had a “stick it to the man” mentality. He really didn’t want to work for anyone. Not that that’s anything to admire, but anyway, so he and his family really lived in poverty. He and his children’s suffered from malnutrition. He probably suffered from his own ambitions. He had insomnia, stayed up late to write, and his main work was Das Kapital from the word capital.

Now they spell it with a K, but Das Kapital, that is a giant book on economics. The people that admire Marx, they would see Das Kapital as the work of a genius, but I am not in that camp.

So let’s move on. Karl Marx would die in 1883 and this is kind of, what’s important to know is that he died without ever testing or implementing his economic theories. All of his ideas on the economy really were just theories, the first person to ever tap in and try to live out the theories was Vladimir Lenin, who of course founded the USSR. That’s another story. And I think you’re kind of getting to that with your people if you’re studying The Iron Curtain, right?

Lara:

Yes. Definitely. Lenin is his own book all by himself. I feel like that Marx was sort of the sort of person that you refer to when you talk about children failing to launch – where they’re not capable of going out and doing their own things, they sort of live in the “idea” world and they never put foot to the idea.

Linda:

Yeah. Yeah. I’m not sure where he was on that scale of like personal responsibility.

Lara:

I don’t think he had much if that’s how he treated his family, but again, that’s my opinion. So now that we’ve gone through the bio, let’s get into the really good stuff. Let’s talk about his ideology.

Resources for Your Homeschool

 Breaking Stalin’s Nose The Red Umbrella Broken Strings Red Scarf Girl I am David The Wall Zlata’s Diary God’s Smuggler Young Reader’s Edition The Story that Cannot be Told Twentieth-Century Caesar: Benito Mussolini Angel on the Square

 

Linda:

Okay. I do want to just dive right into it, but I always feel obligated to take people back one step to maybe one of his greatest influences. And that was a guy named Georg Hegel (gay ork HAY go), usually pronounced by Americans as George Hagle. Now, do you know much about George Hegel?

Lara:

I have come across the name in passing, but I really don’t know much about him.

Linda:

I think that’s a common experience. He’s a name that’s dropped in a lot of textbooks because he’s kind of a warmup to this and a warmup to that. But let’s hover on him just a bit if we may, because I think as his ideas had a lot to do with where Karl Marx went.

So in a nutshell, here’s George Hegel.

He looked at society as always trying to improve itself. Making adjustments along the way, but in his fancy terms, he would make it a three step process. So first he would say, there exists a thesis. That’s really the status quo. That’s the way things are. But since made, it’s always burdened by problems. Because you know, we’re never content.

Then man tends to drift to a number two step, which is an anti-thesis or antithesis as it’s properly pronounced. And that’s when man begins to fight against the weight thing, because remember he’s got a problem with something, right? And then in doing that, he number three aims for a synthesis where man’s trying to compromise and come up with something between the thesis and the antithesis and make a new normal or a third way.

Now I use the expression “new normal” very intentionally here, because that is exactly what we are hearing a lot of right now. So I would just say, be careful with that expression, don’t buy into quickly to a “new normal”. It’s got Hegel written all over it.

Anyway, he believed that in time this cycle would repeat itself. And so whatever the synthesis or the new normal was at least of one era, well then it would soon become the next era’s thesis or status quo. And of course men  would find something wrong with that. And then just go on and on and on with the next antithesis and the next synthesis and keep going. So Hegel, believe that man follows this pattern, ever evolving into new and better ways.

Now I’m not sure that Hegle really wasn’t on to something as far as getting restless with the status quo, right?

I mean, we do do that. Man does strive for new and better. That seems to be built into us. But here’s where I believe I part ways with Hegel.

He would eventually think that man moved up some moral ladder by improving society as he went and Carl Marx agreed with him and they both wanted to see man climbed the ladder. And they would say, here are the steps you’re they would say, man should evolve from slavery, to feudalism, to capitalism, to socialism and finally to communism.

Okay. Kind of let that sink in for a minute. So capitalism is just a little blip on the screen, they believed that man hadn’t fully evolved yet to something better. Now, before I do leave Hegel, which I will in just a minute, let’s clarify something though about mankind from a biblical worldview, something that I assume your listeners will appreciate.

So if truth be told, man is incredibly innovative, isn’t he? Man is creative. Certainly when it comes to making things newer and better. I mean, after all we are made in the image of God, that’s where that comes from.

Just look at phones for example, don’t they get better all the time? I mean, my mom, who’s now 85, grew up with a party line. I grew up on a landline, and today we all have cell phones that are practically equivalent to a computer.

So yes, mans conveniences improve over time. They kind of do evolve and usually improve doing so, but not the heart of man, because according to scripture, we are born with a sin nature.

So development and innovation and progress, they just can’t save us from that sin. Romans 3:23, I’m sure you know it, teaches all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, end quote.

So that truth, you know, that truth applies to every time period. It wasn’t true just for ancient man or medieval man or the Renaissance man. That includes modern man though.

We may make it to the moon, which now we can’t even say that anymore. Now we have to say Mars, because you don’t say recently blasted off a new Rover to Mars. And next thing you know, it will be people.

But anyway, although we can do that, man is still a sinner. So in great contrast to Hegel believers in God would see man, not scaling up to higher morals with time, but really in a cycle of sin and then redemption, we just don’t get spiritually better with progress.

Oh, it would be nice if we did, but we don’t, we can’t seem to evolve out of our sin nature. Sinners will sin. Sinners will die in their sin, at least apart from salvation that comes through Christ.

So let me insert this salvation verse for anybody listening, who just may not know it, but Romans 6:23 says the wages of sin is death, but the gift of life, God has eternal life in Christ Jesus, our Lord. Isn’t that a beautiful verse? We should probably sing here.

Lara:

(laughter) Yes!

I think really, if you look at the people who believe in salvation through works, which is also unbiblical, it’s sort of the same kind of ladder that Marx believed in. And we are also told in the scriptures that salvation is through faith alone and that by the grace of God, through Jesus Christ. And so I think it’s really important to see how those sort of line up similar to each other because both of them are obviously against what we’re taught in the Scriptures. Let’s keep going and talk about Marx in depth.

Linda:

Yes, yes. I would say we’ve got Hegel kind of behind us. Hope you just kind of keep him hovering in your brain and let’s turn to this ideology of Marxism.

What I’m gonna do, Lara is break it down into six points from the communist manifesto. It’s not that Karl Marx gave us these six points. These are just sort of my summary points for clarity.

So number one, and if you have note takers now at the time, number one, Marx believed that all conflict was rooted in an economic class struggle between the poor, who he would call the proletariat and the rich who he called the bourgeoisie. That’s just a good French word.

So the poor proletariat and the rich bourgeoisie, you could say that that was his thesis. All right. That was the status quo is that he saw man existing in an ongoing state of class warfare. He had no confidence in may and being able to clear that up, thought that man would just forever be greeting. Okay.

Number two, to settle conflict between the classes Mark’s wanted to get rid of one of the classes you can guess what class he wanted to get rid of. Do you think it was the poor proletariat or the rich bourgeoisie?

Lara:

If it were me, I would want to get rid of the poor proletariat and bring them up. But I don’t think that’s where he went with it.

Linda:

Yeah. That’s not where he went with it. Yes, he wanted to destroy the bourgeoisie. We could also call that the system of capitalism. So this is his anti-thesis. His antithesis is to change the status quo, to negate the bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie is those that were landowners, business owners, industry owners. I can only say this one thing about Marx and maybe where he was coming from. And that is, he was in London during a time where there was a lot of child labor. These are before child labor laws. So some of this could have been from what he observed, but that’s about all I can give him. Okay, let’s keep going.

Number three, to eliminate capitalism, or the bourgeoisie, Marx sought to deprive them of private property or private industry because you see it requires private property or private industry to really kind of be participating in the bourgeoisie to be prosperous.

So number four, to take away private property or private industry, Mark’s encouraged the proletariat – that was the poor, the working poor – to use force and revolt. He was truly comfortable with that.

And he even had a name for it. He would nickname it, the dictatorship of the proletariat. Wow. I mean, just think about that – the dictatorship of the proletariat. So who’s in charge. He would say the working poor and that’s by force. It’s the dictatorship.

Now let me just insert this right here. I know that COVID is a real force, but how convenient for Marxists that this pandemic is destroying private industries that can’t stay open. I don’t think that’s coincidence, but we’ll keep going here.

So number five, now remember I just have six of these – number five, according to Marx, once the proletariat achieved revolt, it was going to need something in between like a transitional government, all right. To get to his final step. And he had a name for that too. He called it a socialist government, which is by definition, a government owned property industry, government owned property industry and means of production.

So the government had to run all those big things and he called that socialism. That’s why a lot of American skin crawl at that term, but let’s keep going.

So six – Marx believed that socialism would balance out the haves and the have nots. And this is by force, that was by forced redistribution of wealth. Then he believed that classless, stateless, pure communism would be achieved and then mankind would exist in what he called “freely developed association“.

So you could say that that was his synthesis. That was his final third, new third way, new normal. So his final goal was that he wanted a utopia on earth after violently reducing mankind to a one class society without any rewards or incentives.

Now I will say this too. It may sound lofty the part about the utopia, but isn’t it ironic that the end result of communism, isn’t something we hear very much about.

It’s not what Marxists talk about. Seems so much more often that Marxists really focused on the process and the method of getting there.

You see Marx himself, here’s what he said. When he was asked to summarize communism and I’m going to quote him, he would say, and I quote, “The theory of the communists may be summed up in this single sentence.” Okay, you’re ready, Lara? This is it. It’s only four words. Okay. “Abolition of private property.”

Wait a minute, that doesn’t have anything to do with utopia. I mean, that’s about destruction, but that’s how he summed up communism. That it would be the abolition of private property.

Oh, what do we see in today’s riots? Well, you could call it the abolition or the destruction of property. It’s on the news every night. I think it is there to intimidate us, to shake up the status quo or the thesis. It gets very intentional and I think it’s heartbreaking.

Lara:

It is absolutely heartbreaking.

Have you seen the Incredibles, the original the Incredibles movie?

Linda:

Yes.

Lara:

Okay. So there’s this part where the villain has trapped Mr. Incredible. And he’s telling him his great plan to sell all these super power gadgets to everybody. So everybody can be a super, and then when everybody’s special, nobody will be special. And that scene always just gives me this horrible pit in my stomach. It doesn’t matter how many times the boys watch the movie, because to me that’s very much what the robbing of one group to give to another to make everybody “even” is, you can’t really get that balance.

And if you get that balance by force or by manipulation, you know, it’s just terrible. And that mindset that goes along with Marxism is just so focused on that one transitional goal without really looking at the end that obviously Marx didn’t care who got hurt in the process.

And I think that’s just a really important thing for people to understand in the Marxist ideology – that he really was an advocate for a violent takeover.

Linda:

Yeah. He thought the ends would justify the means, but the end is such a utopic scenario. It is what flies in the face of biblical truth, which is what I actually wanted to address next. So what a perfect segue.

As a Christian author, I do feel compelled to contrast Marxism to what the scriptures teach at least to point out where most believers would say, like, where is it exactly that Karl Marx went wrong? So I have against six points. And if you have note takers, grab your pens!

I’m going to rattle off a lot of scripture with this. And I think you always have transcripts too, don’t you? So if people want to write those down, we can keep moving on.

So number one, Karl Marx, remember this, he didn’t believe God existed. He was an atheist. He wrote, and I quote, “the idea of God is the keynote of a perverted civilization. It must be destroyed.”

Isn’t that sad? He thought that God was the author of the perversion of our civilization. Ooh. Anyway, well, the Bible tells us in Genesis 1:1 certainly that there is a God who created the heavens and the earth. And actually He’s quite worthy of our praise. He’s not the author of the perverted civilization, but anyway, some scripture to back that up Exodus 20:2 – 6, Psalm 14:1, Revelation 4:11.

Number two, Karl Marx believed that the heart of man’s problems was found in economics. Question, does the Bible teach this? Well, not exactly. Now, certainly 1 Timothy 6:10 and other passages mention that the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, but that one verse out of Timothy certainly doesn’t tell the whole story.

The Bible teaches that mankind is created in the image of God. That’s Genesis 1:26, but through the sin of Adam and Eve, man has inherited a sinful nature. And I’ve already pounded on that, but that’s Genesis 3:22- 23. And so greed is like part of that sinful nature, but it is not the root of all evil, it is just part of it. Anyway. And Jesus actually had a lot to say about that.

So that leads me to number three, Karl Marx thought that he could change the sinful greedy nature mankind by just manipulating his circumstances. Remember he wants to just get rid of a class. Like let’s just put everyone on the same playing field, by the way, like you said earlier, it’s not that he wanted to elevate everyone to the bourgeoisie. Instead he wanted to take everyone down to the proletariat.

So he thought if he could manipulate mankind, that would just take care of that nature. Well, does the Bible teach this? No. According to the Bible man cannot reconcile his sinful nature, nor can he overcome sin by his works. You already mentioned that with Ephesians 2: 8-9, as a matter of fact, God sent Jesus Christ as a sacrifice for mans sin. That’s John 14:6, Romans 5:6-8, Hebrews 9:11-15.

So number four, Karl believed he could relieve the problems of the poor by restructuring society. Does the Bible support this? No, not exactly. The Bible addresses the needs of society in multiple ways, but here’s two. It would say in Mark 12:17, Jesus encouraged the payment of taxes to one’s government that sure didn’t make the Jews very happy.

He did it, but he did because that would help meet the needs of its citizens. But also you can find in Deuteronomy 15:11, Matthew 26:11, Jesus taught that the poor would always be with us, but did he ever forget them? No, he was quite mindful of them. I think he would allow it because he wanted members of society to care for the needs of the poor. So he would be like, the poor will always be with us. In other words, the Bible does deal with the heart of man, which is where greed springs and the Bible does promote sharing. And maybe we just haven’t done a good enough job. The church could always do better, but anyway, a few verses to support that Psalm 41:1, Proverbs 14:21, Proverbs 29:7, Acts 6: 1-4, in Galatians 2:10.

Number five, Karl Marx wished to remove society’s financial incentives for achievement. And then he also modeled a poor way work ethic. Does the Bible agree with this? No. Luke 10:7, 2 Thessalonians 3:10, 1 Timothy 5:8 – They teach that a worker is worthy of his wages and he really should work if he is able and should provide for the needs of his household. So there’s a contrast isn’t there?

And number six, Karl Marx believed that a perfect society could be made here on earth somehow by the hands of man. Well, what does the Bible have to say about that? Revelation 21: 1-5 teaches that the Lord alone, because He’s so mighty, He in His time will bring about a new heaven and a new earth where He says there will be no more curse and the nations will be healed. That’s Revelation 22:2-3.

And no, we can’t even fathom that, but if God says it, I believe it. And we know that there was paradise before man fell. So somehow He is going to restore that. Now I don’t know all the details, but I trust it as a matter of fact, when I hear and think about the nations being healed. After all this study of world history, I’ve done that makes me just weep to even imagine.

Those are Marx’s ideas laid out in the Communist Manifesto. And what I just was explaining is that those are not founded on biblical principles or biblical truth.

The Iron Curtain – The Homeschool Garden Morning Time

The Iron Curtain is a 4-week long morning time session that dives into The Iron Curtain, communism, and touches on the results of communism during that era and the effects continuing on today. 

Lara:

No, they are definitely not. And this is excellent background. But I would really like for us to cover a few of the results of communism before we go so that everybody can kind of have an understanding of how devastating this ideology has actually proven to be

Linda:

Sure. Well, I’ve got four quick ones just for context.

So number one, according to the congressional record, 135 million people died in the 20th century by efforts of just a few leaders to implement communism.

You want me to say that number again? 135 million or more have died in the 20th century alone. And we would see that, for example, in the Bolshevik revolution, from which we’ll get the USSR, the Korean war, the war in Vietnam, the communist takeover of China as just to name a few.

God only knows what the 21st century will hold because it’s not as if Marxism has died off.

Lara:

Right?

Linda:

Well, and as for results – by Marx, his definition of communism, I have to ask, does it or has it ever existed?

Well, no.

Not really. We haven’t seen anything in a “free association”, right. But I would say that there are five nations today, still trying to be communist, sort of. They seem to be stuck indefinitely in high governmental control of socialism and they’re not freely existing associations.

Can you name them, Lara? You know, the five communist nations.

Lara:

I know there’s China, and there’s Cuba, and there’s North Korea, and Vietnam. And then there’s the last one that I can never remember.

Linda:

It’s harder to pronounce. That’s why. It’s Laos, L A O S, Laos. Yeah, those are the five that, you know, if you were to Google, would say they’re communists.

Now there are certain other ones striving and nations pop up and sometimes adopt it. But those are the five lasting ones at this given moment. Now you may notice not on the list is the USSR because while yes, it was entirely founded on atheistic communism. And I’m giving away, you guys are studying this all month, but the USSR ,of course, imploded in 1991, by the way, Lara, do you know what day of the year that it fell?

Lara:

It was Christmas.

Linda:

Yes, it Christmas day. Isn’t that just fascinating? The imagery?

Now I know we all know that Jesus probably wasn’t born really on December 25th, but that is the day that the world would acknowledge the birth of Christ. And I just think that there’s no coincidence that an atheistic government fell on that day. Anyway, sorry, I’m getting caught up in that story.

But number three, I told you I’d give you four quick results. So the third result, let’s not forget that Marx believed that socialism was going to have to be put in place for communism to ever thrive. And that is why Americans squirm when they hear socialism. I think so many people wisely associate it with communism, but of course there’s those that don’t, and it has grown immensely popular in the last few years. And I think some think that, you know, let’s go back to the root word. I think they hear about socialized medicine or social programs or social justice. And they kind of lump them all together when they are not the same thing.

Scandinavia’s famous social programs. They’re not socialist though. Many try to point to them. They’re, they’re thriving under, um, free enterprise and capitalism.

Lara:

They tried an experiment though?

Linda:

They did. And then had to come back from that because they started having economic issues.

They were going bankrupt under socialism. So they swung back the other way.

And just the last result of Marxism, I almost don’t have to say this, but I do think the idea is alive and well and wreaking havoc, as we speak on our city streets. Now how far it will go. I don’t know, or how long this particular tension will last. I certainly don’t know, but I would say if you were one of my students, we would pause and discuss it and use an opportunity like our headlines to tie in all this historical information, because that’s what history is good for.

If we can’t turn on the news and find some places to connect, well, we’re all wasting our time, but it’s there. It’s not very hard to find. We just need to pay attention and be good students.

Lara:

Absolutely. Well, thank you very much, Mrs. Linda for sharing with us.

I think this is a very timely message and I think our listeners will be able to apply this and hopefully they can share with us some of the headlines that they have been using with their students when they discuss this at their home.

Can you tell us about some of your other products that our listeners might enjoy?

Linda:

Sure. Well, if your listeners found this helpful, I certainly have a whole lot more of it. What I’ve presented here though. I’ve, you know, elaborated some just for you today, but I’d say most of that’s contained right in my series, The Mystery of History.

There are four volumes for all ages, again, covering four different time periods. And the book comes in a text as well as an audio book. And I think the audio book is just really good for families maybe just easing into this lifestyle because they might be overwhelmed in the beginning.

So if you want a soft start to school, just get an audio book and start listening and discussing. You don’t have to dive all the way into the deep end, right in the first week of school. Although I give you plenty to do, we have materials that will help you make memory cards and timeline figures and maps and quizzes and literature and all that.

Also, in case your folks don’t know, I do teach live classes to high schoolers using my volumes three and four as our texts. And then those have spun off onto self-paced classes. And then we even have the lectures you can purchase just as a standalone, if you don’t want the cost or commitment of the other two. And all of those have really great slides and visuals to bring history to life.

Lara:

Oh, that’s wonderful. And I will plug your audiobooks as well. We’ve used those in our family and we love, love, love, love them. My 10 year old is quite the history buff and a lot of that is thanks to you!

I think you have a gift for the readers as well?

Get your F-R-E-E workshop from The Mystery of History!

The workshop is here: https://themysteryofhistory.com/store/workshop-store/when-bible-history-and-world-history-meet-workshop/ and enter the code lararocks at checkout.

Linda:

Yes! The gift is this, I just thought, especially for those who might go to the front end of my series, which uniquely weaves Bible history and world history together. I have a workshop titled When Bible history and World History meet Face to Face.

It’s just a fun workshop because we find these intersections between Bible and world that really do just help our Bibles look like the great history book that they are, you know? And so what they can do is go to my website and get the workshop here, they have a place for coupon. If they’ll put in Lara rocks, lararocks all lowercase, one word That will be good up until October 31st, 2020. So it’s normally $3.99. You’ll get it for free. It’s about a 45 minute presentation.

Lara:

Wonderful. Thank you so very much, Linda, for sharing with us all today. Thank you.

Linda:

Thanks for having me and just, you know, allowing me to carry on about this topic. It is something like I said, I’ve been monitoring for a long time, so I’m glad to have listeners today. Thank you.

 

About Linda Lacour Hobar

Linda Lacour Hobar, author of The Mystery of History, is a passionate follower of Jesus Christ, a genuine “people-person”, and a fan of comfortable high-heels. Through homeschooling her children, and service as a missionary, she discovered a deep love for world history where the famous and the infamous have left their mark in time. In the year 2000, Linda sensed a clear call to write The Mystery of History for her children, grandchildren, and generations to come that they might know “the mystery of God . . . in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” (Col 2:3)

For over 20 years, The Mystery of History has been well received by all ages! While fact-filled and thought provoking, Linda’s writing style is warm and personable. The “Chronological, Christian, Complete” program is user-friendly and includes activities for multiple ages; timeline work; mapping exercises; memory games; quizzes; literature lists; audiobooks; and much more to fully engage students of all learning styles. In 2016, Linda broadened her scope of teaching to include cutting-edge online classes and lectures, which she maintains with great care, compassion, and conviction for biblical truth.