Environmentalism

Key Verse: Colossians 1:16

Introduction: The environment must be included in a study of ethics because of the implications not always so evident that accompany it. In this section, two views will be under discussion. 1) Biblical Environmentalism. There is a strong biblical responsibility concerning the environment. Many believers are not aware that God, as part of His creation and Divine plan, has given direction and commands concerning the world in which we live. Man is a steward of Gods world. 2) Modern Environmentalism. This view has perverted the biblical doctrine, and the environment has become a symbol of control, religion and radical regulation. It is difficult to separate much of the modern environmentalist movement from the New Age movement! One means to clearly differentiate between the two is to note that with Biblical environmentalism, man controls creation; with modern environmentalism, nature controls man!

I. A BIBLICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM

A.    The Divine Plan for Creation

1.   Man is Sovereign of Creation

a.   man is the ruler of creation, Psalm 8:5
b.   man is the representative of God in creation, part of the Imago Dei, Gen. 1:26-27

2.   Man is the Center of Creation

a.   the heavenly bodies are formed to determine times and seasons, Gen. 1:14f; 8:22
b.   the purpose of the heavens and earth is to serve man, Gen. 2

3.   Man is the Steward of Creation

a.   mans accountability of the earth, Psalm 24:1
b.   mans accountability of the animals, Psalm 50:10-12
c.   mans responsibility in creation, Gen. 1:28 replenish the earth
d.   mans responsibility with creation, Gen. 1:26 subdue it, have domain over it

B.    The Divine Providence in Creation

1.   His Care Sustains Creation, Col. 1:17
2.   His Concern Spans All Created Life:

a.  beauty in nature, Matt. 6:28-30
b.  food for living creatures, Matt. 6:26
c.  death of His creatures, Matt. 10:29

3.   His Compassion for His Creatures

a.  rest for animals, Exo. 20:10,
b.  food for animals, Deut. 25:4, 1 Cor. 9:9
c.  life of animals, Jonah 4:11

C.    The Human Preeminence in Creation

1.   Our Responsibility and Concern of Animals:

a.  all animals die because of our sin, Rom. 5:12, 8:22
b.  creation is important to God, and thus should be to us, Gen. 1:26-27 (our care for it)
c.  all things are Gods possession and are therefore valuable, Psalm 24:1, 50:10-12
d.  we have dominion over nature, Gen. 1:26-27
e.  we are infinitely more important than animals, Matt. 6:26, 12:12
f.  destruction of nature is destruction of a gift from God
g.  our dominion is parallel with our stewardship

2.   Our Renouncement of Cruelty to Animals:

a.  God commands care, Exo. 23:4-5, Deut. 22:6-7
b.  animals have been used of God for His purposes, Num. 22:28ff
c.  our new nature as believers forbids cruelty, Pro. 12:10.

Consider: I once heard it said that one can tell the true heart of another by how one treats animals, whether pets, farm animals, There is much truth in this statement, in my opinion! This does not mean that hunting, fishing, eating meat, is wrong, as long as one considers his responsibility, accountability and stewardship. God will judge and does condemn wanton destruction! Dr. Kober writes, "The sport of hunting is certainly justified if it serves a useful purpose such as thinning out a herd or obtaining needed food. Hunting for the sheer joy of destruction as was done with the buffalo and the carrier pigeons is immoral because man destroys without good cause that which does not belong to him."¹

3.   Our Responsibility to Environment

a.  how we behave in nature, Deut. 23:12-13
b.  how crops are grown and cared for, Exo. 23:10-11,
c.  polluting the land is selfishness. Geisler said it well: "At the basis of pollution is selfishness. Man wants much out of nature but he is willing to put little back into it. He wants to use it for gain whether it is usable again or not."²
d.  pollution affects people now and in the future. Geisler again states: "Garbage influences sanitation and sanitation affects the health of persons. Sewage affects rivers and lakes, and polluted water affects the health and enjoyment of people. Bad air is breathed by good men and it tends to make the less complete The physical world was made for man but it is not to be abused by man, because there are other men yet to use it."³

II. A NEW AGE (PAGAN) ENVIRONMENTALISM

Defined: In using this phrase I am referring to the modern definition of radical New Age environmentalism, with the extreme characteristics that are essential to support and defend the view. You are likely familiar with the nomenclature that is used, as global warming, over-population, mother earth, There is an entire "theological" scheme with this type of environmentalism that cannot be disregarded in a discussion such as this, so by virtual necessity we must discuss some of the main tenets of the New Age Movement. If not for the belief system such as this, there would not be this type of radically, unstable and irrational movement. Having some background on this will enable you to understand the emphasis in our world on nature, the environment, and mother earth. Note that this is a very brief synopsis only.⁴

In point of fact, it is easy to contrast a Biblical environmentalism with pagan environmentalism. In a Biblical framework, man controls and cares for nature according to Gods Word. In the pagan framework, nature controls and cares for man - the exact opposite. In the Biblical perspective, man is sovereign over nature. In the pagan perspective, nature is sovereign over man.

The following outline provides a brief but adequate overview of the New Age environmentalist belief system, and the motivating factor behind the radical views that are held.⁵

A. Monism. The New Age system teaches that all of the cosmos is derived from an ultimate and single source. All diversity flows out from this source to the universe around us.

B. Pantheism is the natural result of the monistic view. "God" is an ultimate principle that is identified with the universe. Thus, "God is all and all is God." The challenge for humanity is to tap the knowledge of the divine that is resident in each person. Each person must choose a sadhana, or path, through which one will experience a transformation that will eventually bring the knowledge of the divine. This may take quite a large amount of time, thus

C. Reincarnation and Karma (karma is the law of retributive justice) are derived from Hinduism and believed in the New Age movement. Good or bad will be granted in the next life as people are cast into the wheel of rebirth, depending on their previous good or bad actions, thoughts and beliefs.

D. Universal religion. Since one must find divinity within self, and since the system is Monistic, there is ultimately only one religion. All divergent religions are alternate paths to the same reality.

E. Personal transformation. However one decides to get to the goal (divinity, god consciousness), there are successive steps which leads the potential New Ager to develop and attain the goal. Initially, one must have a mystical or psychic experience that results in a paradigm shift from an "old world" belief system to the "New Age" system. It would include the acceptance of the preceding points (Monism, Pantheism, ) Note that the acceptance and embracing is not based on propositional truth, but is based on mystical experiences. To help attain this experience, three mediums are used.

1.   Holistic Health Movement. Transformation involves healing, but not the type of healing as a medical doctor would provide. The healing of the "whole person" is emphasized. This means that people are more than physical bodies, thus more than the physical needs healing. The means used for this includes acupuncture, exercise, massage techniques, diet, herbs, teas, vegetarianism, the "natural means."⁶ The purpose of holistic health is that the natural healing will enable the "universal life energy or force to take its course." Thus, the healing is for the material and immaterial aspects of personhood, as it were getting transformed into the higher "self," and becoming one with the ultimate "One."

Other terms reflecting this movement include:

• altered states of consciousness (through drugs, meditations, mantras, )
• attitudinal healing
• acupuncture
• applied kinesiology (muscle testing)
• channeling (through spirit guides)
• crystal healing (use of a supposed power within crystals to heal)
• herbal medicines
• homeopathy
• Iridology (the study of the human iris to diagnosis present and potential illnesses)
• Meditation

There are additional practices that are related to the NAM

2.   The Consciousness Movement. This term describes the efforts or organizations and people to teach the NAM doctrine and philosophy. This takes place in training seminars in business, art, philosophy, culture, classrooms, churches, A quick glance in virtually every bookstore (even in some Christian bookstores!) will reveal a myriad of books teaching New Age doctrine and practices.

There are several celebrities that are very devoted to the NAM, along with many in very influential positions of authority. Beware of the NAM terminology!

3.   Human Potential Movement. This stems from the pop-psychology movements and philosophies. It holds the "Im OK, Youre OK" analysis. It esteems man and his nature. One strives to move forward to the One that will transform you to a higher consciousness.

F. Planetary vision. "Because nature is viewed as being an aspect of the One, the earth is viewed as being the single most important entity on which life is sustained New Agers favor a political platform in which issues concerning the environment are hegemonic (dominant) because those caught up in the all-important New Age ideal of a paradigm⁷ shift toward planetary consciousness."⁸

It is in this sphere that the radical environmentalist movement is fueled. Beware of terms, names, as Planetary Citizens, Green Movement, Global Education Associates, It is thus that those in the NAM attempt to conserve the natural world at all costs. There are animal rights activists (in their scheme, both man and animals are part of the One), vegetarians (ditto), again, note the distinction between biblical environmentalism and NAM environmentalism. It is ultimately Gods Truth and Plan verses the lies and plans of Satan!

Douglas Groothus summarized the counterfeit New Age Movement well:

• Evolutionary optimism: a counterfeit kingdom
• Monism: a counterfeit cosmos
• Pantheism: a god
• Transformation of consciousness: a counterfeit conversion
• Create your own reality: a counterfeit morality
• Unlimited human potential: a counterfeit divinity
• Spirit contact: counterfeit revelations
• Channelers: counterfeit revelation
• Religious syncretism: counterfeit religion⁹

It is important to realize that the NAM accepts every world religion into their system the only exception being CHRISTIANITY! One can be a Hindu, Muslim, Atheist, but it is totally incompatible with the true Christian faith. Make no mistake: the NAM may well set the stage for the false messiah we know as the Beast, Man of Sin, 666!!

For further study:

Geisler, Norman. "The New Age Movement," in Bibliotheca Sacra, Jan. March 1987, pp. 79-104

Groothus, Douglas. Confronting the New Age, InterVarsity Press, 1988

--- Revealing the New Age Jesus, InterVarsity Press, 1990

--- Unmasking the New Age, InterVarsity Press, 1986

Matrisciana, Caryl. Gods of the New Age. Harvest House, 1985.

Lutzer, Erwin and John DeVries. Satans Evangelistic Strategy for the New Age. Victor, 1989

There are other books and numerous articles in Christian periodicals addressing the movement.

End Notes:
[1] Dr. Manfred Kober, Ecology: Natures Use and Abuse, Man and Society, p. 8
[2] Norman Geisler, Ethics: Alternatives and Issues, p. 254-255
[3] ibid., p. 255
[4] If further study is desired a bibliography is included at the conclusion of the chapter.
[5] Much of the information for this summary is from George A. Mather and Larry Nichols, Dictionary of Cults, Sects, Religions and the Occult, Zondervan Publishing House, 1993
[6] It is noted that there is nothing negative about some of these activities.  For example, proper diet, exercise, using herbs and teas, can be positive things (see Gen. 1:29, 2:15, 1 Tim. 4:8).  The point is not necessarily what it is (though some things, such as acupuncture, a common occult practice, should always be avoided) but how and why it is used.
[7] The word paradigm has become a common word, which basically can be defined as a parameter, model, type.
[8] Mathers, Nichols, p. 203.
[9] Douglas Groothus, Confronting the New Age, pp. 20-31  
 

Capital Punishment

Key Verse: Genesis 9:6

I. THE BIBLICAL COMMANDS ADVOCATING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

A.    In the Old Testament (not an exhaustive listing)

1.  Genesis 9:5-6 introduces capital punishment by the LORD God. Note

a.  The execution of the death penalty, 9:6a
b.  The explanation of the death penalty, 9:6b

Note that the life of man is to be protected, whether from animals (9:5a) or other men (9:5b). Life is a direct from God (2:7-9), was divinely imparted (2:7), and divinely maintained (2:9). The importance of the life of man, made in Gods image, emphasizes the importance of protecting that life! Some would argue that capital punishment for a murderer "cheapens" human dignity. In reality, it accentuates human dignity! When one person murders another, he is murdering one made in Gods image. Some would argue this is a form of "Deicide" along with "homicide." Life is so valuable, that if you dare break the command of God regarding the sanctity of life, your own life would be required. This is the essence of Gen. 9:6.

2.  Exodus 21:12-14 commands capital punishment for premeditated murder.

3.  Exodus 21:22-23 commands capital punishment for harming a pregnant woman or her unborn baby.

Note that there are other instances that God commanded capital punishment in the Scriptures, such as kidnapping (Exo. 21:16), adultery (Lev. 20:10), cursing father or mother (Lev. 21:17), offering human sacrifices (Lev. 20:2), rape (Deut. 22:23-27), and even rebellion in a son (Deut. 21:18-21) among many other examples. We would argue today that murder seems to be the crime which would demand capital punishment, and perhaps even in the Old Testament. Kaiser states, "Only for the first crime, premeditated murder, was there a ransom or a substitute payment unacceptable (Num. 35:31) but presumably all other capital crimes could be committed as the judges determined. The death penalty marks the seriousness of these errors."¹ Though this may be arguable, there has been no documentation that any rebellious son was stoned in the ancient writings that have been found. David was not put to death for adultery (2 Sam. 11:4, though he certainly should have been for murder!), nor was Solomon for worshipping Molech, which likely included child sacrifices (Lev. 20:2, 1 Kings 11:7). Thus I would at least argue that not all of the capital crimes listed demanded death. The crime of "murder," the Heb. radzah, however, had no exceptions.

B.    In the New Testament

1.  Romans 13:3-5, which defines the purposes of government

a.  to protect the good,
b.  to punish evil-doers, v. 4 The bearing of the sword seems to validate that capital punishment was still the command. Though there are some that would argue that the sword is merely a symbol of authority, there is no scriptural warrant for that interpretation. He bears the sword for a purpose!

2.  Acts 25:10-11 teaches that:

a.  some crimes are worthy of death, v. 11
b.  the government has the right to issue the punishment, v. 10
c.  the guilty have no right to protest the death penalty, 11

3.  John 19:11, Jesus Christ illustrates that:

a.  He did not oppose capital punishment in His case
b.  He did not oppose capital punishment in His teaching
c.    He never said that the government has no right to exercise capital punishment

II. THE SECULAR ARGUMENTS OPPOSING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

A.    Social Argument: "Capital punishment does not restrain crime."
Response: It does deter crime! It prevents the murderer from committing other crimes, and deters other criminals. Studies have shown that every execution of a convicted murderer deters 156 murderers.²

B.    Penal Argument: "Capital punishment does not rehabilitate the criminal."
Response: Capital punishment is not designed to be rehabilitative, but retributive. There is a difference between chastisement and justice.

C.    Moral Argument: "Capital punishment does not reflect love."
Response: God is not only love, but light, love, life, truth, and just. Love does not automatically dissolve wrong-doing. Love may be geared toward the greater good the people that will not be victimized by the perpetrator in the future.

D.    Pacifist Argument: "Capital punishment does not rectify evil. Two wrongs dont make a right."
Response: Governments are appointed to be Gods instruments of justice. Crime demands punishment at all levels. What God calls right we must not call wrong. And again, it is retributive, not corrective.

E.    Spiritual Argument: "Capital punishment could snatch sinners out of heaven before salvation. Our efforts should be on salvation, not condemnation."
Response: There is plenty of time for repentance between sentencing and execution. There is not proof that more time will cause man to be saved. A most important fact to remember GOD IS SOVEREIGN!!

Summary: Kaiser summarizes it well, "It was because humans are made in the image of God that capital punishment for first degree murder became a perpetual obligation. To kill a person was tantamount to killing God in effigy. That murderers life was owed to God, not to society "³

It is important to see that capital punishment for the crime of murder was commanded in Genesis 9, is practiced in the Old Testament, maintained in the New Testament, and was never rescinded. Thus, it is still compelling! It is also important to note that all human life taking was not wrong e. g. besides capital punishment, wars may be justified (Gen. 14, Josh. 6), as is self defense (Exo. 22:2, Luke 22:36).

End Notes:
[1] Walter Kaiser, Toward Old Testament Ethics, p. 92.
[2] Study: Executions as a Deterrant, the Des Moines Tribune, Nov. 30, 1976.
[3] Walter Kaiser, Toward Old Testament Ethics, p. 91.  
 

Key Verse: John 17:17

Introduction: We are living in an age of relativism. By using that term, I am referring to the lack of absolutes that are to govern life and conduct. In relativism, right and wrong is not determined by objective truth, but by subjective opinion and pragmatic results. Thus, many believe that there is no absolute truth, and that in certain situations it is acceptable to lie. This may be more of a dilemma than it appears to be. Even many "Christians" do not believe in firm absolutes! It is therefore important to define and maintain truth biblically, and recognize how God views lying.

I. THE ORIGIN OF TRUTH

A. God the Father, the Author of Truth, John 17:3, 1 Jn. 1:5

B. God the Son, the Incarnation of Truth, John 1:14, John 14:6

C. God the Spirit, the Revelation of Truth, John 14:17, 16:13

D. Gods Word, the Inscription of Truth, John 17:17, 1 Cor. 2:10ff

II. THE OFFENSE OF FALSEHOOD

A. The Author of Falsehood, Gen. 3:1-5, John 8:44

B. The Illustrations of Falsehood:

1. Josephs brothers, Gen. 37:31-35
2. Potiphars wife, Gen. 39:13-18
3. Pharaoh, Exo. 9:28
4. Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5:4, 8

C. The Objection of Falsehood

1. Pro. 6:16-19
2. 1 John 2:21
3. Rev. 21:8, 27; 22:15. The reason liars cannot enter heaven is not because the sin of lying cannot be forgiven, but that this is the type of sin that keeps men from coming to the Savior.

D. The Interpretation of Falsehood

1. Every deviation from the truth is the result of sin.
    
2. A point can be reached where a person actually believes the lies which he / she invented. Adolph Hitler had a formula that went something like this: the bigger the lie, and the more outlandish it is, the more likely people will believe it.
    
3. A liar is a person who asserts something that is contrary to fact.
    
4. A person is a liar when he passes on misinformation, no matter what his motives or designs may be.

   All falsehood, as deviation from truth, is wrong per se

   Prejudices and false judgments are deviation from the truth

   Any deviation from truth is sin because falsehood is contrary to the character of God.
    

5. A person may display falsehood overtly in several ways:

   Design of deceiving or injuring somebody

   Design of benefiting somebody: Rahab hiding the two spies, telling children the shot from the doctor wont hurt; the reality of Santa Claus, Easter bunny,
    

6. Some points to consider: all need to be understood to be figurative or symbolic.

   Parables: 2 Sam. 12:1-6, a legitimate conveyor of truth.

   Fables: Judges 9:8-15. Can be used to illustrate truth. Be biblically discerning with the use of them, 1 Tim. 1:4, 4:7.

   Irony: 1 Kings 18:27.

   Novels, stories, which are half true and half fiction. Fine as long as this is known.

   Exaggeration. Can be a form of lying and should thus be avoided. It can be used as figure of speech "He eats like a horse," "He drives like Jehu," but cautiously.
    

7. The Three Ingredients of a Lie:

   There must be the communication of an untruth

   It must be known to us to be an untruth

   It must be with the will and intent to deceive him to whom we speak it, and to lead him into error.¹

III. THE EXAMINATION OF TRUTH:

 Is it Ever Right to Depart from Strict, Literal Truth?

A. An Affirmative Answer: "It is right to lie at times under certain conditions."

1. "There are rigid moralists who maintain that no circumstances can justify departure from strict and literal truth not even to deal with children, save life, to restrain madmen, to prevent criminal acts, or to deter an enemy in time of war. Most students of ethics, however, are in accord with sound human understanding and general practice which allow for exceptions."²
    
2. " you can tell the necessary falsehood deliberately and positively, from principle, with a good conscience void of offense toward men, and sincere in the sight of God."³
    
3. "Though the scriptural ethic places a premium on the sanctity of truth, the obligation to tell the truth has limits. One frequent example discussed in the history of truth-telling is the principle of telling the truth to whom truth is due (italics is the authors). Here truth is linked to justice in a way that allows for the righteous and honorable to lie when to tell the truth involves aiding and abetting injustice."⁴

B. A Negative Answer: "It is never right, under any circumstances, to deviate from the truth."

1. "No claim is more basic or ultimate than that of truth. We cannot regard any other sanction as higher on the altar of which truth may be sacrificed Is life itself more sacred than truth? God is love. But God is truth also. Love and truth do not conflict in Him and His truth is never curtailed or prejudiced in maintaining and promoting the interests of His love."⁵
    
2. "Sometimes the distinction is made between partial truth and untruth. Using the case of Samuels question to Yahweh about "How can I go? Saul will hear about it [that I have come to anoint David] and kill me" (1 Sam. 16:2). The Lords answer was, "Take an heifer with you and say, I have come to sacrifice to the Lord." (1 Sam. 16:2). Apparently Saul had forfeited his right to know all truth: nevertheless, Samuel had no right to speak an untruth. Lying is always wrong, whether it is the midwives lie (Exod. 1:17) or anyone elses lie. Scripture repeatedly warns against all falsehoods and commends truth-telling (Pss. 27:12; 35:11; Prov. 6:19; 14:15). Even failure to come forward as a witness is severely condemned in Leviticus 5:1."⁶
    
3. "Truthfulness may never be sacrificed for anything else. It cannot be sacrificed for love because love and truth do not conflict. They do not conflict in the nature of God. Love and truth are not antithetical in the actions of Christ. It cannot be sacrificed for life because God is the sovereign over life and no person can die one moment before God permits him to leave this world."⁷

IV. THE ENIGMA CONCERNING TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD

A. Some Biblical Challenges

1. An example of untruth: Rahab hiding the spies, Josh. 2 - She was spared because she feared God, not because of her lies about the spies An example of a half truth: Midwives and Pharoah, Exo. 1
    
2. It is not clearly stated that they lied! Most believe they did, but the truth could have been fabricated. "Ole whats her name is about to deliver want some more coffee?!" Again it was their fear of God for which they were blessed.
    
3. An example of concealment: 1 Sam. 16. Samuel was told by God to do one thing and say another. Samuel did what he said he came to do, 1 Sam. 16:4-5 Under some circumstances, it may be permissible to withhold part of the truth. Concealment is not the same as deception or lying, see II. D. 7 above.
    
4. An example of strategy for war: Josh. 8. There was concealment by the army, a feigned retreat, and a trap.
There was no action on Israels part contrary to fact or intent Truth does not demand that the other person understands everyting perfectly that we are saying or doing

Consider: Concerning some of the biblical materials, John Murray (see III. B. 1) states "We would require far more than Scripture provides to be able to take the position that under certain exigencies (necessities) we may speak untruth with our neighbor. In other words, the evidence is not available whereby we may justify deviation from the sustained requirement of the biblical witness that we put away falsehood and speak truth."⁸

B. Some Practical Challenges

1. What about estimates? ("What time is it?" You say "Quarter after 4" when it is really 4:16).
    
2. What about figures of speech? (your child asks, "Does the sun rise in the east or the west?" You answer "east" but it doesnt!)
    
3. What about approximations? ("How big was the fish?" "5 lbs." when it was really 5 lbs. 2 oz.
    
4. What about life and death issues? If you had been living during the Holocaust, and were hiding Jewish families in your basement, how would you have answered the Nazis if asked? What would you choose lying to the wicked, or allowing innocent victims to be slaughtered by the wicked? Is it more important to love the truth or love your neighbor? Are they incompatible? Is Gods truth contradictory?
    
5. What if our nation would pass a law demanding the life of your child, and they came to your door and asked where your child was?

Conclusion: John Frame made the following comment. "It is never right to disobey a command of God, and it is never sinful to do right."⁹ There are solutions. Seek them biblically!

End Notes:
[1] Ezekiel Hopkins, quoted in Walter C. Kaiser, Toward Old Testament Ethics, Academie, 1983, p. 224.
[2] Eavey, quoted by Dr. Manfred Kober, Truth: Honesty the Best Policy or Only Policy?  FBBC, p. 4
[3] Smyth, quoted by Dr. Manfred Kober, ibid., p. 4
[4] R. C. Sproul, The Biblical View of Submission to Constituted Authority in The Christian and American Law, Kregel Publications, 1998, p. 128.
[5] John Murray, Principles of Conduct, Eerdmans, 1957, p. 272.
[6] Kaiser, p. 95.
[7] Kober, p. 4.
[8] Murray, ibid., p. 146.
[9] John M. Frame, Medical Ethics, P & R, 1988, p. 9.
 

Key Verse: 1 John 2:15-16

Introduction: It was a challenge to name this chapter the "medium of society," as it seems so trivial. Television, and the movies and programs that are carried through it, form a philosophy, world view, standard and ethic which has a tremendous effect on society. As with music, it teaches a religion. And it is powerful! In television and movies, there is an experience attained through the senses of seeing and hearing, unlike other forms of entertainment such as reading novels or listening to music. Television can actually place you "in the realm" of the setting. Thus, it is a powerful teaching tool! As believers, we must understand the power and purpose of the modern screen, and obey biblical commands and principles concerning its use.

I. THE HISTORY OF TELEVISION AND MOVIES

A. Silent films, 1910-1920. Mainly characterized by humor and romance. Charlie Chaplin was a favorite of this era. Charlie Chaplin was barred from the U. S. A. because of his sympathies for Communism and dislike for America.¹

B. Classics, 1920-1940. Walt Disney began producing cartoon films such as "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs." Dr. Kober, quoting the Encyclopedia Britannica: "In the U. S., the first documentaries were made under the Soviet influence and reflected the thinking of the extreme left wing The public, old as well as young, wanted to see how the wealthy lived, dressed and misbehaved, and skillful directors such as Cecil B. DeMille helped educate and entire nation in the boudoirs (bedrooms), lingerie and riotous living. The worship of the stars reached delirious proportions."²

C. Westerns and Crime films, 1940-1950. Advocated violence, murder,

D. Sex and scandals, 1950-1960. Hollywood turned more and more to sex and scandal to lure people back to movie houses, as the popularity had decreased.

E. Shock and splatter, 1970-1990. Films about Satanism and witchcraft (the Exorcist, Poltergeist, ) the supernatural (Star Wars), extra-terrestrials (Close Encounters of the Third Kind) blasphemous films (Jesus Christ Superstar) and hard core pornography were the prime movies for our "entertainment."

F. Science fiction and horror, 1990s - > . Science fiction and horror, often with strong occult and New Age themes, are prevalent. These are often coupled with nudity and other forms of immorality.

Consider: These periods cover a general pattern not a particular rule. For example, "The Robe" was also produced in the 1950-1960 era. Nevertheless, a pattern has accompanied each period with a definite philosophy that impacted the culture. As stated at the outset, this is a powerful teaching tool! Letters E and F can be demonstrated by the increase of interest in the occult over the past two decades, and the intense perversion that has permeated our culture. Homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, couples living together outside of marriage, all reflect those axioms! The amount of violence has increased, and the brutality is unspeakable, akin to the Inquisition!

II. THE PHILOSOPHY OF TELEVISION AND MOVIES:

A. A distortion of reality. This is an inherent danger to children and teen-agers!

B. A dispensing of a sinful and worldly philosophy:

1. a promotion of materialism
2. a promotion of immorality
3. a promotion of violence
4. a promotion of profanity
5. a promotion of atheism and humanism
6. a promotion of the occult

C. A domination of personal life. Television dominates many homes, and schedules are built around programs!

D. A destroyer of time. We are called to be good stewards (1 Cor. 4:1-2) and to redeem time (Col. 4:5), not waste it. That is not to say one should NEVER watch ANYTHING on television there are some good things, such as WVCY TV 30, Christmas specials, but one must be a faithful steward of time, treasures, talents, mind, Reading your Bible is infinitely more important, and some good studies about Theology and Christian living are needful for spiritual growth. It is also far better to read some good Christian novels (there are many fine Christian novels that teach biblical values and sound truth) and devotionals to help rather than hinder your walk with the Lord, as entertainment may.

E. A distraction from corporate worship. It is not uncommon for Christians to disregard the worship services of the church to stay home for television.

F. A disturbance of family life. As stated previously, it becomes the family worship center, it detracts from communication and developing relationships, and is all to often the center of attention at meal time rather than family devotions and discussion.

G. A developer of juvenile aggression. What younger children see on television is "real" to them. A Stanford University psychologist, Albert Brandura, lists the following immediate effects of television violence:

1. It reduces viewer "inhibitions against violent, aggressive behavior."
    
2. It teacher viewers "forms of aggression - that is, giving them information about how to attack someone else when the occasion arises.
    
3. The ethical ending, in which the villain gets his desserts, does not antidote the violence that occurred before. It may keep viewers from reproducing villainy right away, but it does not make them forget how to do it. The ethical ending is just a suppresser of violence, it does not erase.³

Note the following report from Readers Digest:

1. TV violence produces lasting and serious harm
2. Those "action" cartoons on childrens programs are decidedly damaging
3. TV erodes inhibitions
4. The sheer quantity of TV watching by youngsters increases hurtful behavior and poor academic performance.⁴

H. A disruption of the learning process. Entertainment replaces learning, as watching replaces reading and thinking.

I. A degrading of morality, as it glorifies sex, violence, cf. Pt. 2, above

J. A deadening of activity. People, especially teens and children, should be productive. Instead of hours of inactivity in a mentally neutral mode, people should be exercising and disciplining their bodies and minds. They should be learning and developing talents such as playing a musical instrument with which to glorify and serve the Lord.

III. A THEOLOGY FOR TELEVISION AND MOVIES

Consider: On this point, please read the following verses which match letters A J in pt. II. Either by command, precept or principle, the Bible addresses every issue!

A. 1 Tim. 1:4; 4:7; 2 Tim. 4:4 F. Deut. 6:6-7; Eph. 6:1-4

B. Col. 2:8; James 4:4 G. Pro. 20:11; 22:6; 22:15; 29:15

C. Exo. 20:3; Isaiah 45:18; Eph. 6:4 H. John 5:39; 2 Tim. 2:15; 1 Peter 3:15

D. Eph. 5:15; Col. 3:8 I. Psalm 101:3; 141:4; 1 Thes. 4:3-4

E. Matt. 6:21, 24 J. Rom. 12:1-2; 1 Cor. 4:1-2; 6:19

Conclusion: From this very brief summary, consider the impact of television and movies have had on our culture. Has it been used for the glory of God, or for the decadence of man?

End Notes:
[1] Sumner, Robert, Hollywood Cesspool, Sword of the Lord Publishers, p. 116-117, 120
[2] Griffith, Richard and Stanley William Reed, Motion Pictures in Encyclopedia , 1971, pp. 898-918
[3] Kober, quoting Krutza & Di Cocco, Facing the Issues 4 Contemporary Discussion Series, pp. 75-76
[4] Readers Digest, TV Violence: The Shocking New Evidence, January 1983.
 

Key Verse: Colossians 3:16

Introduction: You may well ask why this chapter (and the following on television and movies) is included in a course discussing the Bible and social ethics. The response to that is funda-mental: music is a representation, and a testimony, of that cultures views, philosophies, beliefs, ... Thus, it music has a tremendous impact on social ethics. As an example (at least for those growing up in the 1950s 1970s) what type of music did you listen to in your teen-age years? How did it effect you? How does the music of your day compare with music today? Would you say that this culture is greater in morality or less in morality than it was when you were a teen-ager? Note: This topic could be a course by itself, and there are many things that could be taught including music theory, timing, principles and purpose. However, we will be limited to discussing some of the evils associated with the most diabolical form of music poisoning our culture - rock music - and then look at the New Testament principles of music that glorifies God.

I. THE PHILOSOPHY OF ROCK MUSIC

A. The Roots:

1. "The origin of rock music go to the blacks of the deep south, and from there can be traced directly to Africa where it was used to incite warriors into violent frenzy."¹
    
2. "Rock music has an appeal to the old nature and depraved instincts of man. That is probably because of where its roots lie Music historians report evidence has been found to indicate the same melodic and rhythmic styles found in rock music existed in Africa centuries before classical music appeared in Europe. Also, Far Eastern pagan societies show the same rhythmic savagery found in rock music in various religious rites, especially those which involve self-torture."²
    
3. The very term "Rock & Roll" was formulated in the 1950s by a Cleveland, Ohio disc jockey. He was looking for a term for the "new sound" that was gaining popularity. He conferred with local prostitutes about the nomenclature of their trade, which was of course "Rock & Roll."³

B. The Rhythm: the identifying marks of rock music

1. the relentless beat
2. unique rhythm patterns
3. chord progressions and melodic idioms
4. amplification
5. electronic altering

C. The Religion: (the following is truly a microcosm of the multitudes of information available. But make no mistake rock music is a religion, and promotes a "religious" message, doctrine and lifestyle!)

1. Alice Cooper (Vincent Furnier) claimed to be the reincarnation of a 17^th century witch named Alice Cooper.⁴
    
2. Beatle star John Lennon: "Christianity will go. Were more popular than Jesus Christ now."⁵
    
3. Black Sabbath: name of a group, it refers to a day of Satan worship.
    
4. Blue Oyster Cult has the cross made into a question mark as its symbol on each album.
    
5. David Bowie was the first rock star to openly proclaim his homosexuality.
    
6. David Crosby (from Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young): "I figured the only thing to do was swipe their kids. I still think it is the only thing to do. Im not talking about kidnapping, Im just talking about changing their value systems, which removes them from their parents."⁶
    
7. Elton John: "Theres nothing wrong with going to bed with someone of your own sex. I just think people should be very free with sex."⁷
    
8. Iron Maiden: is a group whos name refers to a spiked body case used to torture people to death.

Consider: This is, as stated earlier, just a tiny example of the religion of rock. I would like to have listed some words of a few "songs" but refused to do it in a Christian (or any other!) setting. Lyrics are loaded with blasphemy, pornographic and sexually explicit words of all kinds, brutality (including killing, dismembering and eating babies; killing a handicapped person and driving them through a key hole with a sledge hammer; etc.), cannibalism, prayers to Satan, death, destruction, rebellion, drugs, alcohol, demon worship, occult activity, killing police officers, child molestation, sadism, masochism, coupled with the chaotic, driving noise that has a control over the listeners (cf. I. B. above). Since children and youth are so easily influenced by music, what effect has this had on them? Look at our youth enough said.

II. THE PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT MUSIC

Consider: As I begin this point, I want to make an assessment of so-called Christian rock music as it is played in churches and evangelistic meetings. With the roots of rock music listed above, and the religion that it promotes, is there a legitimate Christian rock? I do not believe there is, any more than there is Christian pornography, drug addiction, drunkenness, Satanism, I believe that Christian rock music has given the devil a very powerful hold in the church that is likely here to stay. We can prevent that from occurring in our churches by learning what the New Testament says about music. I am using the New Testament as our model, but it is the same for the Old Testament music was and always designed by God to demonstrate His glory and majesty, and the beauty of His creation. The Psalms include the hymns of the nation Israel, and they continually magnify the LORD God, telling of His greatness and faithfulness. (The Psalms also make a great prayer book, reading the various passages as a means to worship God!)

A. New Testament Music Glorifies God, Not Man

Consider: When so called Christian rock musicians perform (not minister!), do they draw attention to God above by the beauty of the music and the words? Or is the attention drawn to the musician and the beat, rhythm, and noise of the music? I would suggest the latter, and it is promoted and disguised under the name of "worship." Note what Dr. George Houghton states: "There is a great deal of confusion today about what constitutes appropriate worship, whether we are talking about personal or corporate worship of God. Some expect worship to make them feel good and therefore want church services by which they feel affirmed and satisfied. Others link worship with entertainment, and church services are planned accordingly. These views mistakenly assume that worship is intended to enhance the personal pleasure of the worshipper."⁸

1. The New Testament Elevates God, not Man, James 4:6; 1 Peter 5:5
    
2. Johns desire was for the Lord to increase, and he to decrease, John 3:30
    
3. We are to glorify God in everything, not ourselves, 1 Cor. 10:31
    
4. Mans nature is to be mortified, not magnified, Rom. 8:4; Gal. 5:24; Col. 3:5
    
5. New Testament Music Magnifies God, Not Man, Rev. 4:8-11; 5:12-14; 7:11-12; 11:16-17; 19:1-6.

B. New Testament Music Involves Worship, Not Entertainment

Consider: When the word "worship" is considered, several truths must be observed. It comes from the word proskuneo, and has the idea of 1) "to kiss the hand of one in toekn of reverence; 2) to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence; 3) by kneeling or prostration to do homage to one, or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect of make supplication. In each instance, there is a high degree of humility, homage, honor and respect for the Person / person worshipped.

1. John 4:24, God is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth. Thus, and unsaved person cannot really minister in Christian music. It also means that a believer cannot legitimately perform in the flesh, nor perform in a means which would encourage the flesh! That is neither worshipping in spirit or in truth.
    
2. 1 Cor. 14:15, words that are sung carry messages, and they should be clear to understand. It must lift our thoughts toward Gods being and greatness. Paul also says he will sing with understanding also. This implies that we have an understanding of the Bible, Theology, and music philosophy. It would then be important for the words to be sung in a clear, meaningful message, which a sound, biblical hymnody will produce.
    
3. The great hymns of old, written and composed by numerous believers, contained good scriptural truth and theology coupled with a melody and meaning that lifted the mind and heart toward God above. Since so many in the Reformation Period were illiterate, the hymns were written to teach the people Theology and Bible truths! See, for example, the great hymn "A Mighty Fortress is Our God." Consider how Handle's "Messiah" truly magnifies the Lord Jesus Christ, while leading you to worship and thrilling your soul for the privilege of knowing the One Who is the Object of that great chorus based on Scripture (the entire "Messiah" is Scripture!). (It has always been my guess that the angels may sing this at the Lord Jesus return well have to wait and see!!)

Consider: I would encourage you to study music and worship biblically. The Scriptures contain hundreds of references about each! If God is to be worshipped properly as Psalm 29:1-2 states, "Give unto the LORD, O ye mighty, give unto the LORD glory and strength. Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name; worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness" then our words, melody and motive must be designed to fulfill that purpose. Worship must not be designed merely to make the worshipper feel good, though it should have a emotional effect upon the worshipper. In short, true worship should be God centered, not man centered. True worship glorifies God, and exalts Him for Who and what He is the LORD of glory, King of Kings, Lord of Lords!

End Notes:
[1] Dennis Corle, quoting Dr. David Noebel, The Pied Piper of Rock Music, p. 63
[2] Dr. Michael Doonan, Why Not Christian Rock?  p. 2.
[3] Doonan, ibid., p. 1
[4] Circus Magazine, 12/19/78, p. 23
[5] Newsweek, 3/21/66
[5] Rolling Stone Interviews, Vol. 1, p. 401
[6] Rolling Stone, Oct. 7, 1976, p. 17
[8] Dr. George Houghton, Faith Pulpit, October 2000.
 

 

Key Verse: Romans 1:26-27

Introduction: It is clearly evident that there is a war raging in our culture over the homosexual movement. It is estimated that less than 10% of the culture is homosexual (some believe, and I believe more accurately, less than 3%) though a larger percentage of the populace seems to believe it is acceptable even though it may not be appealing to them. The pro-homosexual movement is very aggressive and "in your face", and is often backed and supported by leading ¹ politicians and Hollywood types.² Several major corporations recognize "domestic partners," meaning homosexuals living together as married couples, allowing them to have employees benefits as a regular biblically ordained family. There are also numerous television programs which include homosexual characters in the cast, fostering acceptance in our culture. To take a vocal stand against the sin of homosexuality invites scathing ridicule from the media, including the names "homophobic, intolerant hatemonger, radical right, " It is crucial for the believer to know and understand what Gods Word teaches about this issue which could be part of the demise of our culture and its church!

A.    Homosexual: describes the propensity for sexual relations with members of ones own sex.

B.    Lesbian: a term for a female homosexual, it comes from the ancient Greek island Lesbos, which was an island inhabited solely by women.

C.    Sodomite: a term for a male homosexual, taken from the name of the city of Sodom and the sin it was known for as found in Genesis 19.

D.    Bisexual: those with a sexual preference for both sexes.

E.    Malakoi>, >arsenokoitai: 1 Cor. 6:9 and 1 Tim. 1:10. Although "... there is some uncertainty about the precise meaning of these Greek terms the majority opinion has been that the first term refers to the passive partner in a homosexual relationship and the second to the active member." ⁴

II. THE DEFENSE PROMOTING HOMOSEXUALITY

A.    Genetic Theory: Some psychiatrists believe that homosexuality is genetically transmitted.⁵ It may thus be considered a sickness! "If biology explains homosexual behavior, it is assumed that individuals are given little choice in the matter and thus cannot be held responsible for behavior they cannot control."⁶

B.    Psychology Theory: Some have believed that early environmental influences produce homosexual tendencies. However, the American Psychiatric Assoc. removed it from a list of psychiatric disorders in 1973, fostering the idea of acceptance among the populace every year following.

C.    Questionable Theories: Some link homosexuality to questionable emotional developments:

• Enforced sexual discipline
• Abnormal family situations
• Rebellion against masculine domination
• Strong maternal influence
• Lack of persons with whom to identify
• Experiences of seduction in youth

D.    Biblical Theories: Some defend homosexuality on Scriptural evidence.

1.  Genesis 19, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was not because of the about sin of homosexuality. According to D. Sherwin Bailey, in his pro-homosexual book Homosexuality and the Western Tradition, 1955, states:

a.  The sin for which the cities were destroyed (if it was sexual in nature) was homosexual gang rape, not homosexuality.

b.  The problem with the city was inhospitality. The demand of the men of Sodom "to know" the strangers was a desire to get acquainted and to see if they were spies. Lot was not hospitable, i. e. he did not follow "the custom of the day" as to the men who were looking for the visitors. Because Lot was a foreigner, he should have sent the two messengers to the men of Sodom first, and then have them in his home.

2.  Judges 19:22-27, which has a similar defense as Genesis 19

3.  Jeremiah 23:14, Ezekiel 16:49, the sins of Sodom that are listed include adultery, lying, helping the wicked, pride, fulness of bread and idleness, but homosexuality is not listed.

III. THE DECLARATION CONDEMNING HOMOSEXUALITY (responses to II.)

A.    Scripturally:

1.  Genesis 19

To say that the sin was homosexual gang rape is ridiculous. The attempt to do it was not successful, as the angels blinded the Sodomites. Sin was punished, not attempts!

To say that inhospitality is in view is equally ridiculous! The phrase "know" in vs. 5 certainly seems to be sexual in nature, as the same word is used of Lots daughters in vs. 8. The men of Sodom would certainly have known the daughters of Lot as far as their identity.

It is doubtful that inhospitality would have been in view, cf. Lots answer in vs. 7. If all they desired was to meet them checking their credentials, etc. would certainly not qualify as wickedness!

It is also most difficult to dismiss 2 Peter 2:6-9 and Jude 7 as the "sin" of inhospitality.

2.  Leviticus 18:22-24, 20:13, Deut. 23:17-18

3.  1 Kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46, 2 Kings 23:7

4.  Romans 1:24-32, 1 Cor. 6:9-11, 1 Thes. 4:3-4, 1 Tim. 1:10

5.  Gen. 1:26-28, 2:24-25, 1 Cor. 7:1ff explains the place and purpose of sexual relationships

B.    Theologically:

1.  If homosexuality is genetic, the genes would be mutant and decrease generationally. Obviously, since homosexuals cannot pro-create, there would soon be no homosexuals!

2.  Psychology even dismissed its own ideas of homosexuality being a mental disorder. Though it was dismissed for faulty reasons, it obviously is not a mental disorder.

3.  To say that ones emotional surroundings throughout ones life will determine his sexual preference is to victimize ones self, and release one of accountability. The Bible certainly rejects this, recognizing the individuals culpability for ones sins.

Consider: There is some debate about homosexual tendencies and homosexual activities. For example, being a homosexual is not a sin, but committing the act of homosexuality is a sin.⁷ This needs some consideration; it is certainly not a sin to be a heterosexual (it is Gods design!) but you can sin in the heterosexual realm. In addition, to say that one is a victim of any of the above removes any hope of change in the future. Yet the Bible teaches otherwise, and many homosexuals have come to Christ and changed their lifestyle!⁸

4.  Homosexuality is a sin against God!

In discussing Romans 1:26-28, 32, Jay Adams states it clearly: "In verse 26 Paul speaks of homosexuality as a "degrading passion," in verse 27 as an "indecent act" and "an error," in verse 28 the improper activity of a "depraved mind," and verse 32 declares it is "worthy of death." One is not a homosexual constitutionally any more than one is an adulterer constitutionally. Homosexuality is not considered to be a condition, but an act. It is viewed as a sinful practice which can become a way of life. The homosexual act, like the act of adultery, is the reason for calling one a homosexual (of course, one may commit homosexual sins of the heart, just as one can commit heterosexual sins of the heart. He may lust after a man in his heart as another may lust after a woman). But precisely because homosexuality, like adultery, is learned behavior into which men with sinful natures are prone to wander, homosexuality can be forgiven in Christ, and the pattern can be abandoned and in its place proper patterns can be reestablished by the Holy Spirit."⁹
 

" there can be no doubt that the Old Testament regarded homosexuality and pederasty as crimes punishable by death (Lev. 18:22, 20:13) In the New Testament homosexuality is again listed in catalogue fashion with other forms of disobedience, such as idolatry, fornication, adultery there can be no doubt that Paul regards homo-sexuality as a sin and a perversion of the order of human existence willed by God "¹⁰

C.    Practically

1.  The danger of AIDS. The average age of men dying of AIDS is 39 ¹¹

2.  Homosexuals usually have multiple partners, quickly spreading the AIDS virus

3.  The average of gays dying of all other causes is 41

4.  Only 1 % of men who practice homosexuality live to 65 or older (average heterosexual men live to be 65 plus)

5.  Homosexuals are three times more likely to have alcohol or drug abuse problems

6.  Homosexuals are 14 times more likely to have syphilis, and 23 times more likely to contract venereal disease.

7.  In San Francisco, the rate of infectious Hepatitis A is twice the national average

8.  The murder rate is 15 times higher among homosexuals than heterosexuals ¹²

9.  The suicide rate among homosexuals is much higher than the national average. 20% of practicing homosexuals have attempted suicide. ¹³

10.  It destroys Gods plan for marriage and family, and perverts what God has established as an ordained institution through which to fulfill the Adamic Covenant of Gen. 1:26-28.

Conclusion: While homosexuality is clearly classified as a sin in Scripture, and I believe a very perverse sin at that, one must realize that God hates all sin including all sexual sin. God will hold the homosexual no more guilty of sexual sin than He will the fornicator, adulterer, according to 1 Cor. 6:9-10.

The church can have a ministry to the homosexual by proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ in love. While many consider them unlovable due to their in-your-face demeanor and clear hatred to Christ and His church, remember that Christ demonstrated His love to us all while we were unlovable, Romans 5:8.

We must be careful not to use derogatory terminology or name calling. Many former homosexuals have been saved, and are now living in the God-ordained institution of heterosexual marriage, have families, and are serving in Bible believing, Gospel preaching churches. Gods Word, energized by the Holy Spirit, has the power to save from all sin!

Yet, we must make it clear that homosexuality is wrong, and confront it as God gives us opportunity. We recognize that it is NOT an acceptable, alternative lifestyle. It will harm our culture, as the point III. C. statistics demonstrate clearly. It also invites the judgment of God! Some have said that if God doesnt punish America for its sin of homosexuality, He will owe Sodom and Gomorrah an apology. Well, God does NOT owe anybody an apology, as He has not and can not EVER do anything wrong. There is an indication that a large percentage of the populace in Sodom were homosexuals, wherein I believe the statistics of homosexuals in America is quite small from what I have seen, less than 10%.

End Notes:
[1] Then President Bill Clinton met with members of the Democratic National Committee of Gays and Lesbians, and stated that I think weve got a much better chance to pass (pro-gay and lesbian legislation) in 2000, and I hope you will help me with that I have said many times, I wish we could have done more [to promote the homosexual agenda] but Im glad we did what we did.  Marc Lacey, Clinton tells Gays He Will Seek to Change Way Dont Tell Policy is Used, New York Times, 17 December 1999, p. A28.  Concerned Women for America states, President Clinton is telling you and the American people that its time you were forced to accept homosexuality as a normal and acceptable lifestyle.  The president is saying that its time to give same-sex love civil rights protection.  How is the homosexuality community doing this?  Through public schools, media, celebrity endorsement, gay militants, literature, television,
[2] Those who have endorsed homosexuality directly or indirectly include Elton John, Ellen Degeneres, Tom Hanks, Roseanne, Kelsey Grammer, Boy George,
R. K. Harrison, Encyclopedia of Biblical and Christian Ethics, pp. 182, 393-394.
[4] Michael Ukleja, quoted by Paul and John Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World, p. 199.
[5] For example see Born or Bred?  Newsweek: Feb. 24, 1992  pp. 46-53
[6] Sherwood Cole, Biology, Homosexuality and Moral Culpability, Bibliotheca Sacra 154 (July September 1997); p. 355.
[7] It may be debatable, but needs some reflection. yes">  Patristic (church fathers) references, like scriptural ones, were directed, however, to the practice of homosexuality, not the desire itself.  There was no condemnation of the person who kept his propensity in check, Christian judgment instead being imposed strictly on those who yielded to its pressures.  R. K. Harrison, normal">ibid., p. 183.
[8] For example, see AFA Journal, August 1995, p. 20. yes">  Many homosexuals have come to Christ and shared their testimonies.
[9] Jay Adams, The Christian Counselors Manual, p. 406.
[10] Helmut Thielicke, The Ethics of Sex, pp. 277-278.
[11] Unless otherwise noted, statistics are from Concerned Women for America.
[12] Manfred E. Kober, Homosexuality: Degeneracy, Debility, or Disease? class notes,  p. 1
[13] Kober, normal">ibid, p. 1

Abortion

Pastor Rick Rogers

Key Verse: Psalm 127:3

Introduction: Abortion was legalized on January 22, 1973 by the United States Supreme Court in the infamous Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decision. Clearly, the law allowed abortion on demand, meaning that the unborn have no right to live if the mother chooses to terminate them. Since that day, one to one and one-half million babies have been aborted every year, certainly involving America in its own holocaust. Currently, about one-third of all pregnancies are terminated by abortion. Thus, by the end of this year, America will be guilty of killing about twenty-seven to forty million of its own citizens. This brings America down past the level of Nazi Germany and the slaughter of over six-million Jews by four to seven times more! The battles continue to rage nation-wide between those who are pro-life and those who are pro-death.

THE TOTALS OF AMERICAN DEATHS

---

II. THE TYPES OF ABORTION

A.     First Trimester

1.  Suction curettage: a small plastic tube which is connected to a vacuum like machine is placed through the cervix. The abortionist then suctions around the uterus, tearing the baby away from the lining, into pieces small enough to pass through the tube and into the machine. The dismembered baby is then reassembled so the abortionist can affirm that he has all the parts.

2.  The dilatation and curettage (D & C) abortion: a sharp spoon-shaped knife is inserted into the uterus and the abortionist scrapes the lining of the uterus and removes the baby and placenta. Again, the dismembered babys parts are collected and reassembled to affirm nothing has been left inside the uterus.

3.  RU486: works by blocking the production of the hormone progesterone, rendering the uterus inhospitable to the fertilized egg. this procedure requires three visits to the abortionist, the use of prostaglandin and surgical abortion as a backup for failure.

4.  Morning After Pill, Emergency Contraception: is a mega dose of the hormone progesterone. It makes the lining uterus inhospitable to the fertilized egg. It is usually used in cases of rape or an unplanned sexual relationship within 72 hours after sexual contact.

5.  Methotrexate / Misoprostol: taken in combination to induce abortion in the first nine weeks of pregnancy. An abortionist injects the woman with methotrexate, then one week later the woman ingests four tablets of misoprostol. She then goes her way and "miscarries" within 24 hours.

B.    Second and Third Trimesters

1.  Dilation and Evacuation (D & E): the abortionist alternates between tearing (or cutting) the baby to pieces and suctioning out the parts. Because the skull is too large to be suctioned through the tube, it is grasped with a forceps and crushed, then removed from the uterus.

2.  Saline amniocentesis: a needle is inserted through the abdomen directly into the amniotic sack. Amniotic fluid is extracted and replaced with a concentrated saline (salt) solution. The solution is absorbed into the babys lungs and digestive tract. It burns the babys skin, and usually takes six hours to kill the baby. This time can be uncomfortable to the mother, as the baby often struggles. Usually within 12 hours labor begins. It can take up to twenty-four hours for her to deliver. To reduce the incidence of live births, many inject drugs directly into the babys heart to cause death.

3.  Prostaglandin: the mother takes prostaglandin either orally, via suppository, IV drip or injection. The drug induces labor, which is usually violent and painful. It does not ensure fetal death, so it is not widely used.

4.  Hysterotomy: same procedure as a Caesarean Section delivery, except the abortionist will aspirate brain tissue, inject a heart stopping drug or cause the baby to bleed to death by cutting the umbilical cord. Supposedly, it is necessary to lift out a dead baby, but there are known cases of infanticide performed when a baby is born alive.

5.  Dilation and Extraction (D & X, Partial Birth Abortion): was developed in order to retrieve live fetal brain tissue for experimentation (compliments of the Clinton Administration). After dilation the entire body of the baby, except the head, is pulled out of the mother. While the baby is still alive, a scissors-like instrument is thrust into the base of the skull and a suction catheter is inserted into the hole. The brains are suctioned out, the head collapses and the rest of the head is removed.

Planned Parenthood, the Clinton Administration, N. O. W., and many in federal government condone and endorse these procedures. President Clinton has consistently vetoed every attempt to pass pro-life legislation, and he and his administration have done more harm to the pro-life cause than any other president and administration. He will go down in history as the "abortion president," which I believe is an accurate (though tragic) legacy.

III. THE THEOLOGY OF LIFE

A.    When Does Life Begin?

1.  It would seem as if conception, when the seed and egg unite, is the beginning of life, Jer. 1:5 (this may even argue against contraception!), Matt. 1:20 (note " that which is conceived "), Gen. 3:15 (note the "battle" of the "seeds"). [It is interesting to note that John the Baptist is brephos as a child in the womb (Luke 2:41, 44), as was Jesus Christ after his birth (Luke 2:12), as were the "young children" of Acts 7:19. Whether in or out of the womb, the same Greek word was used for the child].

2.  At conception, each normal baby obtains its 46 chromosomes 23 from each parent. Each person retains those for the remainder of life. Every person has his / her own genetic code, which is different from the mother or father. This would argue against the pro-abortionists view that the child "is a growth of" the mother.

3.  The beginning of life argument was supposedly answered once for all by French geneticist Dr. Jerome LeJeune: "But now we can say, unequivocally, that the question of when life begins is no longer a question of theological or philosophical dispute. It is an established scientific fact All life, including human life, begins at the moment of conception."¹ This was accepted by the Supreme Court. The beginning of life is no longer the issue used by the pro-abortionist. The argument has since become "Is the unborn baby considered a human being with equal rights and protection by the law?" They would say no, definitely not!

Is this the view of our Founding Fathers? The Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The rights to what? LIFE, liberty, happiness. Does that necessarily apply to the unborn?

"Yes. The founders of our country envisioned the right to life as extending to the unborn. This is evident from several things. First, the English common law tradition, from which our law came, had laws against abortion. Second, the moral law (natural law) from which Thomas Jefferson came and to which he referred to as "the laws of nature" also opposed abortion. Third, during the time of the founders the unborn was defined in dictionaries as a "child in the womb," and a child was defined as "a very young person." Finally, as of 1716, sixty years before the Declaration of Independence, the common council of New York passed a law forbidding midwives from performing abortions."²

Consider: even if there was nothing directly stated in the Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution (and I would say there is!!) silence is a terrible argument for allowing abortion! As you study the Roe v. Wade case, you would realize it was dubious from start to finish.³

B.    Alternative Views:

1.  At implantation, when the zygote becomes attached to the womb
2.  At "humanization," when the embryo has a recognizable human shape
3.  At animation, when human life is evident
4.  At viability, when the baby could survive outside the mothers womb
5.  At birth, when baby draws the "breath of life," Gen. 2:7
6.  At one year of age

Consider: There are no absolutes or factual evidence to any of these views. They are arbitrary, not based upon any Theology or scientific fact (though some may claim they are!). In truth, as discussed previously, the evidence seems to oppose them.

IV. THE TREASURE OF CHILDREN

A.    Conception is Gods design, Gen. 1:18, 29:33, 30:22; Ruth 4:5, 13; 1 Sam. 1:19-20

B.    Children in the womb are considered valuable, Jer. 1:5; Psalm 139:13-16; Mt. 1:20; Gal. 1:15,

C.    Children are a gift of God, Gen. 33:5; Psalm 113:9, 127:3

D.    Children are to bring the Gospel to a generation we shall never see, Deut. 6:7-8; Mt. 28:18-20, and keep the Word of God in the world in which we live

E.    Children were protected from harm or murder by the Mosaic Law, Exo. 21:22-25

Question: Why wasnt there a direct command against abortion, especially in the Old Testament? In a sense there was; the laws governing life and death would have included unborn children. Further, however, abortion would have been unthinkable in the Israelite culture. The more children a couple had, the more blessed they were considered, whereas childlessness was looked upon as a curse. See Gen. 29:30ff, 30:1, 22-23.

V. THE TESTS OF SITUATION ETHICS

A.    Cases of Rape: though this would be a terrible act against the victim, rape rarely results in pregnancy for a number of reasons, such as the timing of the fertile period, the degree of the assault, But in cases that do result in pregnancy, different factors should be considered:

• Would an abortion allow the victim to forget the sexual assault?
• Would she ever forget that she was pregnant?
• Should an innocent victim (the baby) be under a capital crime for anothers offense (the perpetrator)?

B.    Cases of Incest:

• Would an abortion solve the problem of the victim?
• Wouldnt an abortion increase the problem? All an abortion accomplishes is a cover up for the perpetrator!
• As above, why should an innocent victim be punished for anothers offense?

Note: The abortion rate for both rape and incest is less than 2 %, yet it is always the argument you hear from the pro-abortionists. Do not be misled of the 1,500,000 abortions, less than 30,000 are due to rape or incest.

C.    Life of the Mother: though this needs to be addressed, please note: "Fewer than one in ten thousand mothers die in childbirth. It is one of the safest procedures in the country a woman has a 99.99 % chance of surviving childbirth; the risk of maternal death is extremely small."⁴

Consider: is abortion ever justifiable biblically? Some who would accept and defend the pro-life position normally may consider some abortions justifiable. For example, Ryrie says "Is there, then, any justification for abortion? It would appear that one might justifiably abort a fetus if at any stage there is a material aggression against the mother. Such abortion would be in the nature of self defense."⁵ One certainly has the right to defend oneself from death or grave bodily harm. Yet there may be other issues involved. For example, John 15:13 teaches an altruistic love, even to the point of dying. The sacrifice of the Lord Jesus demonstrates this type of love to an infinite degree. In the Exo. 21:22-25 passage, is the mother automatically exempt from the punishment? Is a soldier going off to fight a war willing to sacrifice himself for family and nation? What of the sovereignty of God is it possible for Him to intervene?

D.    Physical abnormality: a large percentage of pregnant women that find out the baby has an abnormality seek an abortion, feeling as if it is "better for the baby" than to be born. However, this is an argument based on opinion, not reality.

Consider: Can you prove that non-existence is superior to a handicapped existence? Have you ever talked to anybody who is handicapped that consistently wished they were not born? According to John 9:3 and Exo. 4:11, Psalm 139:13-16, Who makes people how they are? Who determines who is worthy to live and who is not? Who determines what the severity of the handicap is before the death sentence is given? Is there a place for less than perfect people in our society?

Conclusion: The debates and battles still rage, and likely will for some time to come. We must pray and get involved in the process. Your instructor is convinced that this is a "greed" war fitting into a philosophical plan and order for the world, and not about rights at all. If it were about rights, the unborn and the women carrying them would be protected, or the abortion services would be free. God hates the shedding of innocent blood (Pro. 6:16-17) and He punished His people for it (Jer. 2:34ff; 19:4ff). I believe there is a day of reckoning coming for America and it may have begun!

End Notes:
[1] The is from Dr. LeJeunes testimony given at a Congressional Hearing, Washington, D. C., April 23, 1981, quoted in Matters of Life and Death, Francis Beckwith and Norman Geisler, p. 16.
[2] Ibid., pp. 39-40.
[3] See ibid., Appendix 1, and pp. 48-67.
[4] Ibid., p. 98
[5] Biblical Answers to Contemporary Issues, Charles Ryrie, p. 85.

 

Key Verse: Proverbs 20:1

Intro: The use of alcohol as a beverage is a major problem throughout the world, including the USA. Alcohol is responsible for appox. 66% of all fatal accidents; 70% of all murders; 50% of all rapes; 60% of child abuse and child molestation cases; and commits more people to the mental hospital than any other cause!

I. BIBLICAL POINTS TO PONDER

A.    Biblical Words:

1.  Heb. yayin is grape drink, wine alcoholic and non-alcoholic
2.  Shekar is unmixed wine, or strong drink
3.  Tirosh refers to fresh grape juice, called new or sweet wine
4.  Grk. Oinos corresponds with the Hebrew yayin above
5.  Sikera corresponds with the Hebrew shekar above
6.  Gleukos corresponds with the hebrew tirosh above

B.    Biblical Background:

1.  Wine, including fermented, was used in earlier times to purify water that was stored in cisterns and wells. That was a major use of it! It was mixed with water at a very low ratio, consisting of the lowest ration of (3 parts water to 1 part wine-which was the lowest acceptable ratio; this produced a drink that was 2.5-2.75% alcoholic) up to (20+ parts water to 1 part wine). Thus, it was a sub-alcoholic beverage, which is why pastors and deacons are "not given to wine," I Tim. 3:3; 8; Titus 1:7. In Prov.23:29-31 it speaks of those who "tarry long at the wine." This purification is not necessary in modern times--we have chlorine, sodium chlorohydrates,...

2.  Wine today is different than Biblical wine. "Strong drink...unmixed wine..." in Biblical times was only 3-11% alcohol. Those who drank this form of alcohol were considered barbaric! Distillation, which increases alcohol content, was not discovered until A.D. 1500. Modern wine has 9-11% alcohol; 80-100 proof whiskey and brandy has 40-50% alcohol; Biblically and culturally, these would have been unthinkable!

Consider: Dr. Norman Geisler writes this: "Christians ought not to drink wine, beer, or other beverages for they are actually strong drink and forbidden in Scripture. Even ancient pagans did not drink what Christians drink today."¹ The Bible condemns strong drink (remember, 3-11% alcohol?) which covers virtually all alcohol popular today. No Biblical defense can be used to support the consumption of alcohol!

C.    Biblical Examples of Alcohol Use:

1.  Gen. 9:20-24, Noah becomes intoxicated, and helps promote the first homosexual activity recorded in Scripture.

2.  Gen. 19:30ff, Lot's daughters encourage Lot to become intoxicated and commit incest, causing Lot to be father and grandfather of the same children.

3.  Esther 1:10ff, King Ahasuerus displays lewd, immoral behavior with his drinking companions and asks his wife to do unacceptable things. (Let's give Queen Vashti much credit-she said no, which cost her position in the kingdom!)

4.  1 Sam. 25:25; 36ff speaks of wicked Nabal, the drunken, vile husband of Abigail. Lest we judge Abigail harshly, likely the parents chose her mate-and she couldn't leave him!

Consider: I simply wanted to look at a few references to alcohol and it's result as stated in the Bible. Are any of these cases an example to follow? Do they demonstrate godliness? Which do you want to be-a homosexual? Fornicator? Immoral? Rude, lewd and "son of Belial?" That is the company you keep with alcohol! Is there anything commendable in these circumstances? NO!

D.    Biblical Warnings (Remember, we are speaking of Biblical wine and strong drink-that which is much weaker than alcohol today).

1.  Is. 5:11, "Woe to them that rise early in the morning, [that] they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, [till] wine inflames them!" inflame: of, pursue}.

2.  Rom. 13:13, "Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in reveling and drunkenness, not in immorality and wantonness, not in strife and envying." {honestly: or, decently}.

3.  Gal. 5:19-21, drunkenness is a work of the flesh.

4.  Eph. 5:18, don't be drunk with wine, but be filled (controlled) by the Spirit.

5.  Rom. 14:21, don't cause others to stumble.

6.  I Cor. 3:16-17; 6:19-20, we are God's temple; we belong to God!

7.  I Cor. 6:12, we are not to be brought under the power, or authority/control, of anything other than the Lord Jesus Christ.

8.  I Cor. 6:10, those who are drunkards will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

Consider: This is kind of a problem; when is a person a drunkard--once or habitually? Why don't they inherit the Kingdom of Heaven?

E.    Biblical Questions: what about the passages that seem to condone the use of alcohol?

1.  Remember foremost that the terms were different in biblical times than now!

2.  Isnt drunkenness condemned, not just partaking of alcohol, Deut. 21:20-21, 1 Cor. 5:11, 6:9-10, Gal. 5:19ff? Yes.

3.  What about 1 Tim. 5:23, Pro. 31:6, Luke 10:34? Does this justify alcohol? Yes. It is clear that alcohol (by biblical definitions!) was used for stomach problems, a sedative, and as an anti-septic. Wine was also used as a water purifier, as water would have bacteria as it was stored in cisterns.

4.  Didnt Jesus turn water into wine at the wedding of Cana in John 2? Yes. Again, the type of beverage is not the problem, but the alcoholic content of the beverage! Certainly Jesus would not have made wine powerful enough to intoxicate the guests (cf. Jn. 2:8ff; Isaiah 5:11, Habakkuk 2:15).

5.  In 1 Cor. 11:21, the believers were drunk at the Communion Table, which some say would indicate that there was real wine used in the Communion service. However, they were condemned to sickness and some to death, and not commended for it! And the drunkenness was not necessarily due to the Communion Service, but from the love feast which preceded it.

F.    Biblical Decision: should the believer drink alcohol today?

1.  Will drinking alcohol glorify God? 1 Cor. 10:31
2.  Will drinking alcohol exemplify my Christian testimony?
3.  Will drinking alcohol cause another to sin? 1 Cor. 8:13
4.  Could drinking alcohol enslave me? 1 Cor. 6:12
5.  Will drinking alcohol benefit me? 1 Cor. 6:12
6.  Will drinking alcohol defile my conscience? 1 Cor. 8:7-10
7.  Would drinking alcohol provide a positive or negative example for my children? Deut. 6:7-8
8.  In Bible times, beverages were few; we dont have that problem today.
9.  In Bible times, water was not pure. Today, it is (or most likely is!)
10. When an activity is doubtful, should you do it? Romans 14:23
11. There are anti-ceptics and other pharmaceutical drugs which care for medical problems which are far superior to wine.

Consider: Dr. Geisler states, "New Testament wine was basically a water purification method. It was not an unsafe liquor; it was a safe liquid. But in America purifying water with wine is unnecessary, and plenty of non-addictive beverages are available."²

II. PRACTICAL POINTS TO PONDER

A.    Personal Life:

1.  Liver, kidney, stomach and intestine damage; kills brain cells, decreases sex drive, may lead to coma, heart failure, causes cancer, creates loss of control,

2.  May lead to addiction, even if one begins as a "social" drinker. Consider the following account of what a six pack of beer costs: "Young people, that first beer may carry a cost far higher than the $5.00 you pay for a six pack. Let me tell you what it cost me:

• A career in the Air Force, because after six years I wanted to drink beer instead of report for duty
• An accounting career because I stole from my employer to buy beer
• A close relationship with my parents and sister because they dont drink
• A son and daughter. They refused any contact with me for 11 years. I last tried to talk with them in October 1997, and they want no part of me.
• A close relationship with my wife and another son because my wife doesnt drink
• Friends. I used and abused them until they had enough and cut me off
• A secure future. Im 53 with no savings, assets or insurance
• My drivers license
• Medical care. I fear what a doctor may find.
• My self respect. Im a loser and theres no reason to be sober.

Thirty-three years ago when I drank my first beer, I had dreams and plans. I had no idea that Id become a common laborer and a drunk in 1998. Before you start drinking, think where it may land you in 33 years Believe me, its not worth it."³

B.    Society Life

1.  Estimated 10,000,000 problem drinkers or alcoholics in the U. S. adult population
2.  Alcohol related deaths may run as high as 200,000 per year
3.  Alcohol abuse and alcoholism cost the U. S. about $50,000,000,000. In 1975 alone!
4.  One half of traffic fatalities and one third of traffic injuries are alcohol related
5.  A high percentage of child abusing parents have drinking problems
6.  A high correlation exists between alcohol and robbery, rape, assault, homicide and
domestic violence; and more than one third of suicides involve alcohol.
7.  Taxpayers spend $11.00 to offset each $1.00 paid in liquor revenue.⁴
8.  It is estimated that one out of every ten people who take one drink will become an alcoholic! Is it worth the risk?!

Conclusion: It is quite obvious that God does not desire the Christian to partake of alcohol. Though in some texts wine or strong drink were used in favorable terms (Num. 28:7, for a drink offering; Prov. 31:6, when used as medicinal/pain killer; Ps. 104:15, where the wine is sub-alcoholic and demonstrates the blessing of God for sustenance), it must be studied, taken into context, and consider the differences and purposes of wine then and now. This is vital!

There were two groups that were specifically stated in Scripture that voluntarily abstained from alcohol the Nazirites (Numbers 6:3-4) and the Rechabites (Jeremiah 35:1-11). It would seem as if this was a commendable decision!

It does not seem logical for a Christian to partake of alcohol in light of the biblical evidence, personal and social harm that may result, and the negative impact on ones Christian testimony. Many defend the partaking of alcohol, and ridicule those who promote abstinence. I would close with these warnings:

"Who hath woe? Who hath contentions? Who hath babbling? Who hath wounds without cause? Who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine." Proverbs 23:29-30

"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." Proverbs 20:1.

"So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God," Romans 14:12.

End Notes:
[1] Norman Geisler, A Christian Perspective on Wine Drinking, Bibliotheca Sacra January March, 1982, p. 51
[2] ibid., p. 54.
[3] That First Beer cost man his family, Career in Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Thursday October 8, 1998, Section F
[4] Quoted in Geisler, p. 52.