Humble Opinions and Constructive Ideas

In this lesson I offer my opinions and suggestions for at least partial solutions regarding a few controversial moral and doctrinal issues (in alphabetical order), hopefully alleviating rather than exacerbating confusion about where to draw the line in gray areas, which requires balancing and harmonizing various scriptural principles or teachings, since the Bible does not clearly address the issue.

Most preachers either avoid these issues or else mention only their viewpoint, as though that settles the issue.  However, I will try to share both sides of the issue, trying to resolve conflict in accordance with what Paul wrote in PHP 3:15b-16, “…If on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.  Only let us live up to what we have already attained.”  What have we attained?  Jesus is Lord, and he commands us to love one another.

Frequently, the Bible does not address a modern moral issue specifically, so we fallible mortals must use our God-given common sense informed by divinely revealed moral principles to find the best tentative opinion, remaining open to improvement.  I attempt to be succinct and to offer an original synthesis or partial solution.  The strategy I think works best (is most logical) is to begin by establishing the facts or what is least debatable and then try to clarify the not so obvious or gray area in between.  As I noted at the end of Lesson 1, several biblical passages, such as 1 Peter 3:15b (“Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.”), indicate that we should at least think and attempt to learn the best opinions or solutions regarding issues, even if we have little power to enact them.

Abortion

On one side of the debate are those who believe that pregnant women have the right to kill their fetuses until birth (“birthists”).  On the opposite side of the issue are those who believe that fetuses have the right to live from conception (“conceptionists”).  The Bible does not specifically address this question, although two passages (EX 21:22-25 & LK 1:41-44) seem to suggest that an unborn baby should be considered a person at least by the time of quickening.  However, if a person studies fetal development, at some point he/she will probably contemplate two pictures:  one of a seven-month-old fetus in the womb, and one of a seven-month-old premature but viable baby outside the womb.

This should lead one to understand that geographical location is not a valid basis for defining personhood.  There is no qualitative change that occurs at birth, merely a difference in the mode of breathing and feeding.  And so a person will be led to consider the crucial question:  when does a developing fetus become a human person with the God-given right to civil life so that to kill it is murder and warrants punishment?  People on both sides of the debate usually overlook this question when they discuss this issue, but considerations other than the advent of personhood are irrelevant, unless someone would use the same rationale to justify the killing of children and adults.

Those who adopt the conceptionist viewpoint are certainly right that a qualitative change occurs when the chromosomes in the egg and sperm are united, so that physical development of a new human being begins. and they should mourn the death of a miscarried fetus at any stage of development in the same manner they would memorialize the death of a post-birth baby, in order to practice what they preach or believe.  Those who adopt the birthist opinion apparently assume that birth is the qualitative change that marks the beginning of personhood.  However, learning about fetal development should enable birthists to realize that the advent of personhood definitely does not extend beyond the seventh month or viability, when a premature baby is frequently able to survive.

Thus, birthists should at least become “viabilitists”.  Are there any changes between conception and viability that might more reasonably/logically be viewed as indicative of the beginning of personality?  There is one possibility:  the counterpart of the basis doctors use for determining when an adult person no longer is alive.  This basis is brain death or the absence of certain brain wave activity detected by an electroencephalo-gram (EEG).  We might call this stage “sentience”, referring to the level of brain activity which indicates the fetus has brain life and is therefore a person, who should be granted the civil right to life.  If our best definition of sentient death is the cessation of these brain waves, then it is logical and consistent to view sentient life as beginning at least when these brain waves are detectable.  Thus, I think every open-minded and truth-seeking person on both sides of the abortion debate should agree that the fetus becomes sentient and a legal person at least by that stage of development.  Birthists or viabilists and conceptionists should become “sentientists“.

This is only a partial solution, but it is better than the current consensus that allows abortion throughout pregnancy.  It is a big step in the right direction toward no abortion except in order to save the life of the mother.  It recognizes that a gray area still exists from conception until sentience, so people may still reasonably disagree about the status of the fetus during this period, which may change as science improves.  This view permits most forms of birth control.  Implementing this solution requires educating every post-pubescent person about fetal development until society develops a new consensus that when a fetus becomes sentient, abortion is a type of murder and should be punished appropriately.  Two wrongs do not make a right.

The Beginning

An issue that is continuing to be debated in our society is how the scientific theory of the beginning of the world jibes with the biblical story in the first eleven chapters of Genesis.  The Big Bang theory says that all matter in the universe at the beginning was compacted into a “singularity” the size of a marble before it exploded and began an expansion that apparently will continue for eternity.  The Genesis account says God spoke the world/marble into existence.  Evolution theory says that life evolved from nonliving ingredients that became the various species over billions of years, whereas Genesis says God created the species in seven “days” without describing how or really specifying how long.  In 2 Peter 3:8, it says “With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day”, so presumably “billion” could be substituted for “thousand” in that verse.  Thus, there is no scriptural reason to insist that the “days” in GN 1 must refer to literal 24-hour periods.

Regarding humanity, current scientific research indicates that all people descended from one couple.  Genesis has two accounts of the beginning of humanity.  In the first one, it teaches that mankind, both male and female, were created in God’s image without describing how it was done.  In the second one, it says a man was created first and then a woman from his side.  It names the man Adam, meaning “man”, and the woman Eve, meaning living”.

A view combining both biblical and scientific information is that God created the world, apparently using billions of years (theistic evolutionism), and that Adam and Eve (however they were created) were the first human souls, because they not only had self-awareness but also God-consciousness and conscience (per GN 3:7) and thus moral responsibility for their sins.  A partial solution to this controversy is to mandate that schools teach scientific facts supporting creation as well as evolution.

Biblical Inspiration

Those who view the biblical canon as inspired by God disagree about what this means.  Some people speak as though God dictated every word of the Bible to the human writers, which causes many atheists to be confused, because they do not realize that the dictation theory has several caveats, such as that it refers to the original manuscripts (which we do not have) correctly interpreted.  And the key to correct interpretation is NOT viewing the Bible as a modern science or history textbook, but rather as concerned with communicating God’s will to humanity regarding His requirement for salvation:  THAT is what is inerrant!

The salvationist view of inspiration seems more logical than the dictationist view according to the following train of thought:  Suppose God Himself wrote the inerrant message to humanity: “Thou shalt not lie, steal, murder or fornicate.”  Suppose the first manuscript copier accidentally left out the comma between lie and steal.  Would that invalidate God’s commandment?  No, but it is still a mistake and no longer perfectly inerrant.  Now suppose an evil copier intentionally changed the word fornicate to fumigate.  Would that invalidate God’s commandment?  Not all of it; only the changed word.  How could we know which word or words were correct and not changed?  We would need to compare the commandment with other statements purported to be inspired by God in order to see what is the overall or consistent message, so that we can acquire sufficient evidence to have reasonable belief that the word fumigate should be discounted.

Finally, suppose that no one changed God’s original commandment.  How could we know absolutely or infallibly that it was inerrant?  We could not; we walk by faith.  We would still need to compare it with the totality of truth in order to discover whether there were any inconsistencies.  Thus, a completely inerrant Bible is not needed, as long as there is sufficient consistency in God’s messages to humanity via the creation (TOJ #4), the scriptures (TOJ #3), the incarnate word (TOJ #186) and logic (TOJ #182) for souls to discern God’s requirement for salvation.

Inspiration is like a river:  God determines its banks so that the overall revelation each generation along its banks has includes truth sufficient regarding salvation (kerygma), but God allows the river of revelation to have eddies or discrepancies or minor errors that do not prevent God’s purpose from being accomplished (IS 55:10f, 1PT 1:10-12, HB 11:2-12:2).  This topic will conclude by considering the claim of contradictions in the Bible.

Apparent Contradiction                                         Possible Resolution
MK 9:40 person not against is for                         person is a secret disciple
MT 12:30 person not with is against                     person is a Pharisee who views Jesus as blasphemous

JM 2:24 justified by faith with works                     faith produces fruit (v. 14-19)
RM 3:28 justified by faith apart from law              faith is followed by fruit (GL 5:6, EPH 2:10)

LK 23:46 last words were “Father, into…”           Jesus said both, but witnesses heard or remembered
JN 19:30 last words were “It is finished.”             only one.

MK 10:46 a blind man                                         There were two, but MK witness saw or remembered
MT 20:30 two blind men                                       only one.

2SM 24:1 Lord incited David                              God allowed Satan to incite David.
1CHR 21:1 Satan incited David

GN 2:17 die on day sin is committed                  “die” refers to spiritual death or separation from God
GN 5:5 lived 930 years before dying

GN 7:2-3 seven pairs of clean animals              the latter does not specify how many twos
GN 7:8-9 by twos

GN 20:11-12 Sarah is Abraham’s half sister       law was not given until time of Moses
LV 20:17 brother should not marry sister

1KG 15:14 Asa did not remove high places        Asa removed some but not all of them
2CHR 14:2-3 Asa removed the high places

JN 20:22 disciples received the Holy Spirit          received is not necessarily filling
ACTS 2:1-4 disciples were filled by the H.S.

MT 5:44 love your enemies                                the latter speaks of not being pleased
MT 7:1 the Lord hated Esau

Questions & Conclusions:

Is the Bible verbally inspired?            Extant versions were inspired by love for God’s Word and plan of salvation.
Is the Bible literally true?                   Yes, in literal passages, and metaphorically true in allegorical parables.
Is the Bible sufficiently inerrant?        Yes, but it must be interpreted correctly by fallible folks. (cf. HB 1:1-2, 2TM 3:16-17)

 

Biomedical Ethics

On issues of biomedical ethics, including artificial insemination, cloning, euthanasia, and genetic engineering, I have only a few comments to contribute.  The main arguments against genetic engineering are that experimentation might result in the accidental creation of an incurable disease or its products might be misused.  However, when new learning has potential for good, until it is probable that misuse would greatly harm humanity, it seems worth the risks for society to promote the right use of learning while outlawing and guarding against its misuse.  A person’s identity resides in the brain, so it does not matter whether body parts are obtained via procreation or transplantation.

It is good (reasonable) to help a husband and wife with fertilization.  However, artificial reproductive methods should preserve biblical family values (husband and wife).  Although human frailty results in divorce, single parenting, step relationships, adoption, etcetera, the higher goal of functional marriage should be attempted as plan A.  It would be wonderful (moral) if genetic research found cures for diseases, but it should not cause the termination of a sentient fetus in the womb.  (See Abortion.)  Passive euthanasia or the decision by a person not to use extraordinary means to prolong his/her agony is neither murder nor suicide.  It is what society used to call the natural death that is as inevitable as taxes.  Is it reasonable for people to feel entitled to extraordinarily expensive treatment?  Of course, determining the line between ordinary and extraordinary is problematic and mutable.  Ordinary (the black) would surely include treatment of minor illnesses, and extraordinary (the white) would be multi-million dollar procedures.  Physicians and politicians have to decide where to draw the line (in the gray area) fairly.

Criminal Justice

The current system of criminal justice in this country (U.S.) sometime seems to be more criminal than just.  If I could, I would try to reform the system in the following way.  The key element in my suggestion is for special federal courts to assess a monetary restitution and identify the victim(s) for every felony crime, including murder.  The punishment for people convicted of crimes would be to work for the minimum wage ten hours per day and six days per week.  Their wages would be garnisheed 100% and sent to their victim(s) until the restitution was paid.  Of course, no one could pay the penalty from other funds, so the length of the sentence is determined automatically. This system eliminates plea-bargaining, parole, innocent by reason of insanity and death row.  It does not eliminate the need for lawyers, but their role would be changed to determining guilt and the just consequence/ restitution.  Anyone who intentionally withheld information pertinent to establishing the truth and a fair penalty would be culpable of a crime.

The intent of this system is to maximize the probability of reforming criminals.  The assessed restitution would be minimal on the assumption that the prisoner would reform until their behavior indicates otherwise.  To the initial restitution would be added a uniform (system-wide) surcharge (based on the length of the sentence) to partially recover the costs involved in rehabilitating a prisoner:  food, lodging, job training, counseling, supervision, etc.  Ten percent of the surcharge would be put in a savings account, which the prisoner would be able to access when he/she is discharged. The living situation would approximate as close as practical what the prisoner would need to function as a law-abiding citizen, including an efficiency apartment type of cell, so that the prisoner would do his/her own cooking and laundry.  If a prisoner refused to work, then he/she would not be paid and thus the sentence would be lengthened.

Prisoners who failed to reform but instead damaged property, injured people or committed some other illegal act would have the restitution for that crime added to their original sentence.  They may be viewed as committing suicide by degrees.  When their misbehavior results in a sentence of 100 years, they would be allowed to complete their suicide or be executed.  Of course, deciding on a crime’s just restitution for the myriad extenuating circumstances would require the wisdom of Solomon, as it does in the present system.

Economic Assistance

Jesus once stated that “the poor you will always have with you” (MT 26:11).  However, He also taught us to “give to the poor” (MT 19:21).  These verses suggest that we should do our best to alleviate, if not completely eliminate, the problems related to poverty.  We know that “You shall not steal” (EX 20:15) is the eighth of the Ten Commandments (TOJ #110).  Yet, implicit in the command of Jesus is that if the rich share their wealth, then people will not need to steal in order to survive.  The apostle Paul synthesized these two commands in Ephesians 4:28, saying:  “He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need.”  Another command (in 2THS 3:10) states:  “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.”  Paul also states (in 1TM 5:8):  “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” And again, he wrote: “Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.” (2CR 8:13)  Equality does not require uniformity or conformity or a communist system, which often has resulted in a smaller pie to share, but rather that every person should have an equal opportunity to earn a living.   Sewing these verses together with spiritual thread, we can discern that the will of God is for people who are able to work to seek employment, so that earning a fair wage will provide at least the basic necessities plus something (a tithe or tenth per Malachi 3:8-10) left over for charity.

Full employment at a livable wage is a wonderful goal; the problem is how to achieve it.  On one side of the debate are those who seem to believe that government can solve the problem of poverty by giving people welfare in one form or another.  On the other side of the issue are those who stress that every able-bodied adult should work and support themselves without charity (sometimes called workfare).  The “welfarists” criticize the “workfarists” for an apparent lack of sympathy for the poor, while the “workfarists” say the “welfarists” create permanent dependency by the poor.  The area of agreement by both sides surely includes the fact that people sometimes experience financial misfortunes beyond their control and need help.  Perhaps most people would agree that the need for help often exceeds the capabilities of many families and private agencies, so there is a need for government to do something, but what should wise governments do to encourage industry and discourage laziness?

It seems reasonable that governments should encourage employers to pay workers a wage that will provide at least a subsistence level of living (including food, clothes and shelter) plus ten percent (a “tithe”) for a family of four people.  Parents should not procreate more children than they can afford to support.  It seems reasonable for a typical work week to be no more than six days (then a “Sabbath”), and for a typical work day to be no more than ten hours (although MT 20:1-8 speaks of sunrise to sunset), so that workers have enough time to rest and be with their families.

My idea about how governments might help people find jobs utilizes the concept of indentured employment is as follows.  Every county seat and large town would have a job assistance office, and all of these would be connected by a nationwide computer system.  People could apply for a job anywhere in the country, and the federal government and hiring business would split the costs of relocation and training for those below a qualifying amount of assets.  In return the employee would have to commit to some minimum time of employment (similar to the contract rules of the National Football League).  During the term of the contract, the employee’s tithe (the amount of the minimum wage that is above subsistence level) would be garnisheed until the hiring costs were reimbursed up to some limit that corresponded to the length of the contract.  (Assuming a minimum wage of $5 per hour for 10 hours per day for six days per week, the subsistence level income would be $300 per week or $15,600 per year plus ten percent.  If the cost of hiring were $500, the maximum indentured term would be about 3.2 years at the rate of the garnisheed tithe of $156 per year.)

The federal government would insure the contract and reimburse employers if an indentured employee wanted to quit before the costs associated with their hiring were recouped.  Quitters would not be eligible for welfare; they would have to accept another job, unless they could support themselves some other legal way.  (Of course, those who resorted to crime in order to make a living would be punished with a just penalty.)  The amount of hiring costs owed from their previous job would be added to the new contract.  Ideally, this program would be self-supporting, but it may need to be subsidized by the federal budget, so that the minimum wage and cost of living would be equivalent for everyone in the country.  Surely the cost of helping people become productive workers should be much less than that of welfare.  This program would only guarantee job opportunities for legal citizen independent adults.  It would provide tax incentives that reward companies who have profit-sharing (and loss-sharing for CEOs), healthcare, retirement plans, and other benefits such as those mentioned previously.

 

The Eschaton

What the Bible teaches about the eschaton or end of the world is discussed in Lessons 1 and 2. It was stated that the reason why hell as well as heaven exists is to provide the just consequence for choosing evil rather than God, because perfect justice is not attained during this earthly existence. Thus, hell (as a theoretical or potential destiny) as well as heaven is good!

The teachings of Jesus concerning the eschaton or judgment to heaven and hell are discussed in Lesson 3. (These include #123, “Bear good fruit”; #124, God will reject Jews who reject Jesus as Messiah; #125: Social status is irrelevant in God’s kingdom; #126: Sinners/Unbelievers will not be allowed in heaven; #127: Marriage is an earthly institution (genetic families will be superseded by the spiritual and universal family of God); TOJ #128: Believers will be resurrected (Jesus was the firstfruits); #129: The law of love summarizes God’s will (and saving faith); TOJ #130: Love is the key to understanding GW/truth (and the reason why heaven will be joyful); TOJ #136: Souls have free will.

 

Gambling

The Bible does not teach about gambling or any recreational use of money directly, even though it was a common activity, which indicates that it is not necessarily or always wrong.  However, the Bible does speak against greed (LK 12:15, CL 3:5, etc.), laziness (MT 25:26, TIT 1:12, etc.) irresponsibility (1TM 5:8), and addiction (EPH 5:18), which means the amount spent on gambling should be no greater than what a person would spend on affordable, occasional recreational activities, such as bowling, camping or going to a movie.  Of course, this would put “sin cities” out of business.

Gender Roles and Rights

The biological differences between males and females logically differentiate the roles of fathers and mothers at least through the end of breast feeding children.  I believe the Bible permits any roles not dictated by anatomical differences to be performed by either gender.  Genesis 1:27 states that males and females are equally in God’s image, and Paul taught (in GL 3:28) that cultural, economic and sexual discrimination are wrong.  Thus, men and women (as well as all ethnicities) should have equal political rights and job opportunities.

Regarding the role of women as church leaders, the biblical “one flesh” definition of marriage implies that the wife of a pastor would ipso facto be a pastoress and the wives of deacons would be deaconesses, because it seems likely that God would want husband and wife to share the same ministry, as in the case of Aquila and Priscilla (ACTS 18:26).  Paul’s description of the husband as the “head” of his wife (1CR 11:3) does not negate such joint ministry.  The ministry of Deborah in the OT (JG 4:4) also sets a precedent.  Because both Jesus and Paul recommended celibacy for those who have that gift, presumably unmarried Christian women may also be ministers.  Note that Christ’s concept of leadership is servanthood rather than dictatorial authority (MT 20:26, cf. 1PT 5:1-3).  Thus, Paul’s statements about women being silent in church and not having authority over men (in 1CR 14:34 & 1TM 2:12) should be read in conjunction with his statements regarding equality and mutual submission (GL 3:28 & EPH 5:21, cf. 1PT 3:7) so the role differences can be understood in a way that neither prohibits ministry by women nor promotes the superiority of men.  Paul did not want freedom in Christ to offend the pagan culture (TIT 2:5&8) and thereby inhibit the gospel.

Homosexuality

There are two passages in the NT relevant to the issue of homosexuality.  In MT 19:4-5, Jesus cited GN 1:27 and 2:24 in teaching that marriage is the union of a male and female as “one flesh”, and in RM 1:26-27, Paul condemned homosexuality as shameful lusts, unnatural relations and indecent acts.  In addition to these biblical passages, the anatomical differences between male and female bodies indicate heterosexual intercourse is the natural mode.  Although the cause of gender preference remains unproved per the APA, the design of gender-specific parts implies the appropriate use of those parts as normal.

Although these passages indicate that God intends for people to be heterosexual, He allows homosexuality.  The key question is whether homosexuality is always due to sinful choices.  Some people advocate homosexuality as a “viable alternative lifestyle”, implying that heterosexuals ought to consider freely choosing to try it, which is wrong.   Christians whose homosexual orientation seems not to be freely chosen should agree with the biblical ideal regarding sexuality, and  everyone should acknowledge that homosexual “civil unions” are not biblical marriages.

Hopefully, science will find a cure if the cause of homosexuality is genetic, and therapy will help if the cause is environmental during the formative years of life.  We all have our cross to bear or issues that we struggle with, because this life is not heaven yet, but God wants to comfort us as we do the reasonable best we can with what we have been given.  (Consider the Parable of the Talents in MT 25:14-30).  If the homosexual orientation is genetically and/or environmentally caused rather than freely chosen, then God knows and would not condemn or blame the individual for what was not his/her fault.  All sin is volitional.

Those who are concerned with the morality of sexuality should have equally loving concern for hetero-sexual wrong-doing.  (See RM 1:24&26-27, 1CR 6:9&15-18, 10:8, GL 5:19, EPH 5:31, CL 3:5, 1THS 4:3, HB 12:13, 13:4.)  Just as God wants every heterosexual to have only platonic relationships until married, He must also desire every involuntary homosexual to have only platonic relationships.  A couple may “fall in love” and express friendship physically, but the line between friendly touching and sexual expression should not be crossed until they are married.  Biblical teachings do not prevent two men or two women loving each other and joining their lives together in civil unions or ways other than sexual.  In fact, in heaven we will all be one big, happy family which does just that.

What rights and privileges should be accorded civil unions is debatable, but benefits should be equal for comparable situations.  Benefits not justifiable on the basis of helping a parent to afford staying at home to raise children should be eliminated.  This leads to considering the issue of adoption of children by homosexuals.  Qualified (loving, functional) heterosexual married couples should be given first preference for adoption in order to aim at God’s “Plan A” regarding family structure in the NT:  a mom, a dad, one or more kids, and perhaps grandparents in the same home.  If there are no loving mom-dad couples available, or if one or both of the dyad dies, then less preferable family structures occur.

Another issue regarding civil unions is the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy practiced in the military, which seems reasonable for every type of occupation.  Perhaps there is no good reason any employer needs to know about the personal life of employees, and accidental disclosure of sexual orientation or activity should not be valid grounds for firing.

In summary, I think the preceding viewpoint is the best compromise on this issue where it is impossible not to impose one’s beliefs on someone else.  It is loving toward both homo- and hetero- sexuals.  Although sexuality is a good thing when expressed appropriately, often people exaggerate its importance to the point of making it an idol to be worshipped.  Sex is not synonymous with love.  (See the article below on Sexual Sin.)

Migration and Population

Although the Bible does not teach about migration directly, I would direct the reader to consider the biblical account of the Tower of Babel (in GN 9), when a once unified people became proud and divided by language, then dispersed to fight over the land.  In order to rectify this situation, the following principles seem relevant.

First, God loves everyone in the world (JN 3:16) and includes all kinds of people in His plan of salvation (GAL 3:28-29, EPH 2:13-22, 3:6-11).  Thus, we all have equal rights, which need to be respected as people move about planet Earth.  There is no justification for feeling superior to anyone of a different nationality or civilization.

Second, the moral commandments (summarized by Christ’s command to love everyone) are eternal and universal, so migration needs to occur without murder or stealing (MT 19:18).  Selfishness by those who have something does not justify stealing by those who lack and desire it.  Two wrongs do not make a right.  However, the rich should share (2CR 8:14). Those who have an abundance of land or material possessions should realize they have no divine right to hoard it, but on the contrary they have a divine command from God to be compassionate toward the poor.

Other biblical teachings in addition to the moral commandments also may be applied to the issue of migration.  For example, Paul teaches that those who are able should work (2THS 3:10), so a valid reason for migration would seem to be in order to look for a job.  Also, Jesus prayed (in JN 17:20-23) and Paul preached (in EPH 4:3) that we should strive for unity.  The favorite tactic of the devil is to divide and conquer, whereas the express will of God is to unite and fellowship.

Divinely inspired logic may lead us to additional insights, such as the need to practice birth control in order to be good stewards of the planet and not over-populate or pollute our world.  Also, good governors and employers are needed, who will legislate opportunity and pay fairly.  Citizens of the world should support what is right and needed with talk and tithes or taxes.

Heaven on earth would eliminate painful problems caused by poverty and injustice.  Jobs would be meaningful or even enjoyable, taxes would be fair (progressive), and there would be no political corruption or obscene wealth gap.  There might be open borders, but migration–even motivated by “manifest destiny”–would occur by consent and consensus (compromise).

Pollution

Pollution refers to contamination of our environment by the activities of humans that are harmful to their health.  The Bible does not comment on environmental issues directly, but I find three passages that contain implications for this subject.  First, when God created the earth, it was good and free of pollution (GN 1:31).  Second, when God assigned mankind the task of stewardship over the earth, He did not command them to over-populate and pollute it (GN 1:28-30).  Third, I view the injunctions of Paul against prostitution (in 1CR 6:12-13) as applying also to pollution.  Burning fossil fuels and depleting species of food is “permissible” or legal, but it is not thereby “beneficial” or moral.  Our corporate body, the human race, is not meant for raping the resources God has entrusted to our care, and God will allow unfaithful and foolish stewards to destroy themselves (MT 25:14-30).

Pornography

Pornography is any media (audio, visual or oral) that promotes, encourages or recommends fornication (extra-marital sexual intercourse).  While it is true that morality cannot be legislated without losing desirable freedoms, most people think there is a need for some degree of censorship in an effort to prevent children from becoming perverted.  The problem is arriving at a consensus on what is pornographic and how it should be restricted.  Most people would probably agree that nudity is not necessarily bad, since our bodies are divinely created, but that its badness depends on the context, custom and motive.  For example, wearing a swimsuit is acceptable at the beach, but why do people risk getting skin cancer by over-exposing themselves?  Modeling longerie in a fashion magazine may be acceptable, but being fully clothed in a magazine that advocates extra-marital sex is definitely pornographic.  (See TOJ #24.)

Proto-Gospel

The NT indicates that the “gospel” has existed from the beginning. Paul wrote (in GL 3:8), “The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”

Even before or apart from the Hebrew culture, Luke wrote (in ACTS 14:16-17) that “In past generations God allowed all the nations to go their own way, although He did not leave Himself without a witness, since He did good: giving rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying hearts with food and happiness.”

Quoting Paul’s speech to the Athenians, Luke wrote again (in ACTS 17:26-27 &30), “God has made every nation of men… so that they might seek God, and perhaps they might reach out and find Him… Having overlooked the times of ignorance, God now commands all people everywhere to repent.”

Paul himself wrote (in RM 1:18-20): “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”

And again (in RM 10:17-18), Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ. But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course, they did: “Their voice has gone out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.”

We can see from these verses that truth sufficient for salvation and judgment in cultures separated from the Judeo-Christian tradition is revealed through what theologians call “general” or “natural” revelation. Paul told the Colossians (in CL 1:23): “The gospel that you heard… has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven.”

Applying these verses to the Parable of the Talents (MT 25:14-30), we can infer that the man who received the most talents is comparable to a person who has had the opportunity of learning the full NT gospel of salvation through faith in Jesus as Messiah. The person who received fewer talents may be viewed as representing those who experienced the OT dispensation. And the person given only one talent is like a pagan who has access to nothing more than knowledge gleaned by meditating upon nature. Each person will be judged fairly on the basis of the truth he/she had the opportunity of learning.

 

Racial Prejudice

It is amazing that the Bible does not ever speak of human beings in terms of race.  Paul wrote, “From one man he [God] made every nation of men . . .” (ACTS 17:26a)  We are all one human race (either as descendants of Adam and Eve or of Noah and his wife according to the Genesis accounts), so that racial prejudice and discrimination are wrong.  Jesus said, “For God so loved the world . . .” (JN 3:16) or all humanity, and Paul wrote, “There is niether Jew nor Greek, slave nor free . . .” (GL 3:28).  In other words, all people are one and have equal rights in Christ.

Separation of Church and State

The Bible does not address this issue specifically except as it relates to taxation, about which Jesus said (in MT 22:21), “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”  Similarly, Jesus stated (in MT 17:27) to pay a tax “so that we may not offend”.  This fact indicates that it is proper to maintain a distinction between secular government and religious worship, and that both realms can coexist or even cooperate.

Recently in the U.S., this issue has become controversial in the form of the propriety of prayer in school or the mention of God in the pledge of allegiance.  I agree with the current stance of the federal courts:  that public prayer must accommodate the individual’s freedom of speech without impinging on another individual’s freedom of religion by becoming coercive rather than spontaneous and voluntary, and that the slogans in the pledge or on money can be viewed as a majority’s right to express a cultural value that does not coerce atheists to agree with it.

 

Sexual Sin

The original sin (GN 3:1-6) was Unbelief/Pride (egoism), because disbelieving God’s word (mental illogic) preceded the outward misbehavior of eating the forbidden fruit (PR 16:18). However, Adam and Eve’s subsequent realization and cover-up of their nakedness (v.7) portrays the fact that sexual immorality is a common symptom of spiritual rebellion.

A logical observation of human anatomy teaches that heterosexual intercourse is the natural mode of procreation. It is physically impossible for homosexuals to be married in the biological and biblical sense of becoming “one flesh” (see TOJ #104 and the article on homosexuality). Both homosexual and heterosexual fornication (including adultery) are wrong or harmful to family values.  The misery resulting from fornication includes illnesses such as AIDS, but ungodly people would rather cure the physical disease than their spiritual sickness (TOJ #24). The effect is also psychological. A person who is sexually immoral is less likely to become a faithful spouse; someone who has treated sex casually as recreation when dating will not be prone to view intercourse as expressing marital commitment.

Instead of having the wisdom to enjoy sexuality rightly as the bond of marriage and begetting of children, the ungodly idolize fornication and legalize abortion. They use lust (p.63f.) to make money by engaging in prostitution or by selling pornographic literature, movies and songs, which teach children to identify adulthood with fornication as well as with fighting, drug abuse and cursing (MT 18:6-9). The causes of fornication also include deficient parenting, a poor environment and genetic traits.

Overcoming sexual corruption (such as incest and pedophilia as well as other misbehaviors and mental conditions such as alcoholism and schizophrenia) is difficult, but possible (MT 19:26), because many people have done so, usually with the help of spiritual conversion, counseling and medical treatment. The fact that we should love and forgive people does not mean we should accept immoral behavior as a “viable alternative lifestyle”. However, all of us are sinners (RM 3:23), so we should be very careful to balance reproof with love (TOJ #42).  Also, the Bible specifically prohibits fornication, incest, homosexuality and bestiality, but it does not have a commandment against “autosexuality” or masturbation, which implies that it is not necessarily wrong, although there is a societal taboo against it.

Socialism versus Capitalism

In the early 1900s, the Industrial Revolution produced wealth that became consolidated in the hands of cut-throat capitalists (known as robber barons), who effectively enslaved the working class.  In the mid 1900s this abuse motivated the working class in numerous countries to revolt and install socialist leaders (such as Hitler and Stalin), who also effectively enslaved them.  Between these extremes, the happy medium of progressive capitalism enacted by the Republicans under Teddy Roosevelt is overlooked by ignorant pundits.  While this movement reigned in laissez faire capitalism by means of various reforms including safe working conditions, shorter work weeks, banning child labor and allowing labor unions, the problem of an unfair income gap remains to be solved.

Progressive taxation helps to decrease the income gap, but another solution fails to be mentioned in most discussions, which is to promote the profit-sharing business model.  In a profit-sharing company, workers share the profits through higher wages, shares of stock, health care, and retirement benefits, while owners share the losses by losing income, stock and receiving no golden parachutes when fired.  This is a missing key ingredient that needs to be increased by means of government tax laws that favor such business practices.

Spiritual Israel = God’s Chosen People

Passover celebrates the salvation of the Hebrews from captivity in Egypt. The original Passover included the killing of a lamb and putting its blood on the door frames of the home, so that the Lord’s judgment of sins (killing the firstborn) would not fall upon the members of that household. In 1CR 5:7, Paul calls Jesus “our Passover Lamb”, because his sacrificial death paid the penalty for all who accept him as Messiah. As Paul said again in RM 5:9, “Since we have now been justified by his [Christ’s] blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath [just judgment] through him.” Also in EPH 1:7-8, Paul wrote, “In him [Jesus] we have redemption [salvation] through his blood [death], the forgiveness of sins…” And finally, in CL 1:19-20, “For God was pleased to have all his fullness [Spirit/Word] dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself [and thus to each other] all things [souls/people, Jews and Gentiles]… through his blood, shed on the cross.”

Paul (in EOH 2{13) indicated that the Jewish Passover foreshadowed God’s universal plan of salvation, saying “But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away [Gentiles or non-Jews] have been brought near through the blood of Christ.” We see that the promise God made to Abraham (in GN 12:3b) was that “All people on earth will be blessed through you”, and Abraham told Isaac (in GN 22:8) that “God himself will provide the lamb” or sacrifice that will provide salvation. John the Baptist said of Jesus (in JN 1:29) “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” As Paul wrote (in 1TM 2:6), “Christ Jesus gave himself as a ransom for all humanity”.

Following the Exodus from Egypt, Moses instituted a sacrificial system that portrayed Messiah’s atonement, and then Messiah/Christ Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper as a reminder that His death fulfilled Moses’ legalistic system, so we no longer need to practice it. As we find in HB 7:18 & 8:13, “The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless… By calling this covenant ‘new’, he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.” Paul also taught this truth in CL 2:8, 13b-14, 16, 20 &23, saying that God canceled the written code, nailing it to the cross, so we should not let anyone judge us by what we eat or with regard to a religious festival [such as Passover, a New Moon or a Sabbath/Sunday].

The universality of God’s salvation is also taught by Paul in CL 3:11-12: “Here there is no Greek [Gentile] or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all [as the HS]. Therefore, as God’s chosen people [spiritual Jews per RM 9:6-8, cf. 25-26 &30-32], holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, gentleness and patience… forgive as the Lord forgave you and put on love, which binds all virtues together in perfect unity… The Gentiles have obtained a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness has not obtained it, because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the ‘stumbling-stone’ [Messiah].”

Paul concludes in RM 11:5, “So, too, there is a remnant [of Israel] chosen by grace.” We should relate this to EPH 1:11, “In him [Christ] we were also chosen… and you were also included in Christ [chosen] when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation.” And Peter addresses his first epistle to Gentile as well as Jewish believers, saying (in 1:1-2) “To God’s elect [chosen], strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God”. And again in 2:9-10, “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God [chosen].” Similarly, John says two times in Revelation (1:6 & 5:10) that God has made all believers “to be a kingdom and priests to serve God [chosen].

The NT significance of the Passover was a “mystery” until Paul received divine revelation. As Paul wrote in 1CR 2:7-8; “We speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” Sometimes you will hear preachers speak only of Jews as God’s chosen people as if they still do not understand this mystery either. We have the advantage of knowing the NT, by which we can better interpret the OT–using hindsight, so to speak. While this method is not approved by some scholars, it is one used by the NT writers, which is good enough for me!

 

Status of Jews (Per Jesus)

MT 7:21:  Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

MT 8:11:  I say to you that many will come from the east and the west and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside into the darkness, where there wil be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

MT 10:32:  Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven, but whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

MT 11:6&13-14:  Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me… For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John, and if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.

MT 13:14-15:  This people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes.  Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and I would heal them.

MT 21:43:  I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.

MT 23:37:  O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you!  How often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

MT 28:18-19a:  All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations…

JN 6:40:  My Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

JN 8:42, 44&56:  If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here.  I have not come on my own, but he sent me…  You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire.  He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him…  Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.

JN 10:16:  I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen.  I must bring them also.  They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

JN 12:48a & 49b:  There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words… for the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it.

JN 16:1-2:  All this I have told you so that you will not go astray.  They will put you out of the synagogue.  In fact, a time is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is offering a service to God.

Status of Jews (Per Paul)

RM 1:1-5:  Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus… Through him we received apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith.   (All passages may be condensed.)

RM 2:1-11, 23-29:  God will give to each person according to what he has done… There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil, first for the Jew, then for the Gentile, but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good, first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.  For God does not show favoritism.

RM 2:23-29:  You (Jews) who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?  As it is written, “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”… A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical.  No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is of the heart.

RM 3:1-9:  What advantage then is there in being a Jew?… First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God…  What shall we conclude then?  Are we (Jews) any better?  Not at all!  We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.

RM 3:20-30:  Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his (God’s) sight by observing the law; rather through the law we become conscious of sin…   Where then is boasting?  It is excluded.  On what principle?  On that of observing the law?  No, but on that of faith.  For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.  Is God the God of the Jews only?  Is he not the God of Gentiles too?  Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

RM 4:16-18:  Therefore the promise (salvation) comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all of Abraham’s offspring–not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham.  He is the father of us all.  As it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations.”

RM 9:1-16:  I speak the truth in Christ…  I could wish myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel…  From them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!  Amen.  It is not as though God’s word had failed, for not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.  Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children…  It is not the natural children who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

RM 9:23-24 & 30-33:  What if he (God) did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory–even us whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?…  What then shall we say?  That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it.  Why not?  Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works.  They stumbled over the “stumbling stone”.  As it is written, “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, but the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”

RM 10:1&12-13:  Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved…  For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile–the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

RM 11:1&7-8:  …Did God reject his people?  By no means!  I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham…  What then?  What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did.  The others were hardened.

RM 11:11-32:  Because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.  But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!  I am talking to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles.  I make much of my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them…  You will say then, “Branches were broken off that I may be grafted in.”  Granted, but they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith.  Do not be arrogant…  Otherwise, you also will be cut off.  And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in again…  Israel has experienced hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in.  And so all Israel will be saved…  For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

RM 15:15-16:  God gave me (grace) to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

1CR 1:22-24:  Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks (Gentiles) look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified–a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ (is) the power of God and the wisdom of God.

EPH 2:11-22:  Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (that done in the body by the hands of men)–remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.  But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood (death) of Christ.  For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations.

His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross…  Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

EPH 3:1-11:  For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles–Surely you have heard about the administration of God’s grace that was given to me for you, that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation… that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus…

This grace was given to me:  to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.  His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.

TIT 1:10-14:  There are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group (Jews).  They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach…  Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the commands of those who reject the truth.

HB 3:3-6:  Jesus has been found worthy of greater honor than Moses, just as the builder of a house has greater honor than the house itself…  Moses was faithful as a servant in all God’s house, testifying to what would be said in the future, but Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house.  (See HB 7:18-19,22&27; 8:6-8,13; 9:1,10,15,26b-28; 10:1&9b.)

 

Suicide

There is no specific commandment against suicide in the Bible, even though it must have been commonly known, which implies that it is not necessarily or always wrong.  We have already observed this situation with respect to other issues, including abortion, migration, pollution and separation of church and state.  It is up to us regarding such relatively vague issues to use our God-given reasoning ability to apply moral principles and biblical teachings to each situation and decide what we think is right or at least the best option. A principle that can be applied to suicide is the injunction by Moses to choose life when offered the choice between life and death (DT 30:19).  This implies that a person who is contemplating suicide because his/her life is miserable should seek counseling (HB 10:25) and comfort (MT 5:4).  We should fight (1TM 6:12) and cope (PHP 4:11) rather than run or escape (MT 25:25f.).

 

Vulgarity

The apostle Paul taught about cursing in three epistles.  He stated (in RM 12:14), “Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.”  He wrote (in EPH 4:29), “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths . . .” and (EPH 5:4) “Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking . . .”.  Also, he commanded (in CL 3:8), “But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these:  anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.”

I do not find that these statements need clarification; clearly it is wrong to talk hatefully to someone and say something like, “May God d— you to hell!”  It is also wrong to use cuss words in a friendly manner, such as “D— it, Charlie, how the f— are you, s—head?”

However, is it wrong to use words like “darn”, “fudge”, and “shoot”, since they may be euphemisms for cuss words?  Each person has to answer this question for him/herself, but let us be willing to draw the line somewhere so our psychological environment will not be ruined with verbal pollution.  Instead of alluding to hell, fornication and excrement, let us talk about heaven, true love and good things (JM 3:9-10).

 

War and Capital Punishment

We are saved by faith (EPH 2:8-9), but God’s grace is not cheap, so genuine saving faith IS followed by good works (EPH 2:10, cf. JM 2:17).  By cooperating with God’s Word = Holy Spirit (PHP 2:13) and rejecting evil desires (2TM 2:22), we can be a “good soldier of Christ Jesus” (2TM 2:3), spiritually trained and “equipped for every good work” (2TM 3:17).  Speaking of being a soldier and good works leads us to address the following question:  Is military soldiering a good work?  Can we be both a good soldier of Christ and a military soldier?

The Bible does not condemn any occupation other than prostitution, and notice that Paul here (and Jesus in MT 8:5-13) spoke of soldiering without condemning it, and such silence speaks volumes!  This silence leaves us with the freedom and consequent responsibility to evaluate vocations including soldiering.  The most relevant scriptural references are RM 13:1-5 and 1PT 2:13-14.  Pacifists cite Jesus’ command to turn the other cheek (in MT 5:39) and Paul’s instruction to overcome evil with good rather than seek revenge (in RM 12:17-21) as implying that policing and soldiering are wrong, but these passages refer to personal relationships rather than to governmental enforcement of criminal laws.

In the Romans passage, verses 3&4 are the key ones:  “Rulers hold no terror [imprisonment or execution—a very contemporary term!] for those who do right, but for those who do wrong… the one in authority… is God’s servant to do you good [this eliminates rulers such as Hitler, Stalin and Saddam Hussein].  But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword [means to kill] for nothing.  He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer [murderer, terrorist].”  (By the way, “God’s servant” is what the word “Muslim” means.)

Similarly, 1PT 2:14 says that governors “are sent by [God] to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.”  This truth applies not only to police forces in cities and states but also to soldiers in national governments, implying that (more godly, though imperfect) nations should punish evil tyrants and terrorists.

Thus, soldiers who serve God’s will to fight in righteous or justified wars to defeat murderers are agents of His wrath (Muslims).  Let us note that wrath does not mean a hateful fit of rage, but rather the loving action of righteous anger, such as that displayed by Jesus when he cleared the temple of money-changers (in MT 21:12-13).  God’s wrath metes out the just or appropriate consequence for those who choose to behave evilly and hatefully.  Thus, any killing or other violent actions we do should be motivated by love:  love for God, for divine justice and for the victims of demonic injustice.

We wage war on three levels.  Within our own hearts we seek to let God’s love and wisdom overcome temptations to be selfish and foolish (RM 7:23, 2CR 10:3-5, 1PT 2:11).   On an interpersonal level, we must bear with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity and peace of the Holy Spirit (EPH 4:2-3) rather than be deceived by lies and attempts of the ungodly spirit to divide and conquer us (1CR 3:3, 2CR 12:20, GL 5:20).  And on a corporate level, we must cooperate and enforce just laws, so that murderers are not allowed to destroy more righteous, though imperfect, people (EX 21:12, 21:23).

Because the Bible contains detailed instructions regarding the punishment of crimes such as murder, it is logical to assume that it would contain a commandment and specific teachings against war if pacifism were correct, but it does not.  The OT principle of “life for life” (EX 21:24) indicates that murder is the capital crime for which execution is just, although the NT teaching about forgiveness for minor crimes (TOJ #29 & #36) implies that a society may grant even violent criminals a chance to hear the gospel, repent and be rehabilitated.  Some say that capital punishment risks unjust executions, but this concern needs to be balanced with ensuring that a penal system does not encourage unjust murders.  (See the essay on Criminal Justice.)

The justification of capital punishment can be applied on an international scale.  Godly or civilized nations must cooperate and enforce just laws so that demonic souls like Hitler and Stalin are not allowed to conquer or destroy more righteous, though imperfect, governments.  (See TOJ #30.)  We have a responsibility as ministers of God and disciples of Christ to share the gospel with people in all nations (MT 28:19) and thereby help them to acquire their God-given rights to life (JN 10:10), liberty (JN 8:32&36) and the pursuit of happiness (JN 15:11).   To the extent we are able, we should prevent murder and stop murderous dictators from killing and enslaving people (JM 4:17).  As the world’s super-power, may God grant our leaders the courage to use this power with wisdom to show divine love (RM 5:8) for the poor and enslaved by defeating ungodly regimes (TOJ #45&129, RM 14:19).

As we contemplate the deaths of our soldiers and the sorrow of their families during times of military war, may it remind us of the great sacrifices that have been made by those who have gone before us in order to preserve the blessings of freedom for our country and humanity.  And may their sacrifice remind us of the sacrifice of Christ (PHP 2:8), whose death one day will free us from the sinful nature that does evil and necessitates war against extremely evildoers, so that there will be “no more death or mourning or crying or pain” (RV 21:4).  This recreation of the world is the meaning of Easter, and indeed the reason for the creation of the present universe in the beginning of time.  May it begin in our hearts and be evidenced by our lives, to the glory of God.

One way to show divine love is by forgiving people who do wrong (MT 5:39).  Another way is by teaching people not to do wrong (HB 12:5-6&11).  And a third way is by imposing just consequences for doing wrong.  For those who hurt people, confinement may be necessary, and for murderers execution is deserved (RM 13:4), although a society may decide that circumstances warrant extended confinement instead or even efforts to reform them.

The problem is deciding which type of love to apply to various situations, because we should have learned from the attempts by European nations to appease Hitler in the 1930s that war may become necessary, so resisting evil sooner may be less tragic and destructive of life than waiting until it becomes more widespread.  By the grace of God the United States was able to acquire the atom bomb before Germany and Japan, but it may not have been necessary to lose so many lives in the invasion of Normandy and in the bombing of Japan if Europe had stopped Hitler before he became powerful and allied with Japan.

The lesson of Hitler’s Holocaust against the Jews and Christians is that evil is real, and that we all have the potential to be as horrible as Hitler, although we may battle the tendency toward hatred and selfishness in our own souls (RM 7:22-23).  The death of relatively innocent people who are killed by terrorists continues to remind us of our mortality and our need for God’s goodness and resurrection power as well as of the vital responsibility that comes with our human moral capacity and free will.  Paul wrote that we should “make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification” (RM 14:19, cf. EPH 4:29).  Edification means constructing moral character in those who want to be servants of God (“Muslims”).  Thus, we should embrace rather than reject the opportunity of nation building.

 

Time for a Test

For students of God’s Word in the Bible, the following test is offered:

  1. What is the most important question in life? (ACTS 16:30-31)
  2. What is GRS? …stated most universally? (MT 7:7, cf. P. of Talents)
  3. What is the next most important doctrine to learn? (HB 6:4-6, 10:36-39)
  4. What does perseverance mean? (keep on LGW, cf. marriage)
  5. What is God’s moral will for people? (MT 22:37-40, plus X & truth)
  6. What is a cult? … a heretic? (requires membership; contradicts kerygma)
  7. What is the meaning of marriage? (spiritual union of man & woman for life)
  8. What is pornography? (promotes extra-marital sexual intercourse)
  9. What truth do atheists remind us of? (2CR 5:7, proof at eschaton)
  10. Evidence of saving faith? (loving works, JN 13:35, GL 5:22-23, JM 2:17)
  11. Who are spiritual Jews? (faith like Abraham, RM 2:28-29 & 4:11-16)
  12. Who are true Muslims? (MT 7:21, 24:45 & 1JN 4:2)
  13. What verse encourages ecumenicism? (1THS 5:21)
  14. What passages bridge Islam and Christianity? (1TM 2:3-5, Surah 2 v.89)
  15. What is God’s will regarding drugs? (EPH 5:18, cf. MT 12:43-45)
  16. Who are God’s chosen people? (all believers, EPH 3:11-4:13)
  17. Which gender is superior? (neither, GL 3:28, cf. GN 1:27, 2:22 & 3:6)
  18. How much should we give God? (all we can cheerfully, 2CR 9:7)
  19. What does “ecumenical” mean? God loves everyone and wants us to love one another. (JN 3:16, 13:35)
  20. How is God’s presence manifested? By love (1JN 4:7-8) and truth (1JN 5:6)
  21. Why does evil/suffering exist? (free will, cf. DT 19:30, MT 23:37)
  22. How does God manifest His love most fully? (RM 5:6-8)
  23. What is the one miracle we must believe? (1CR 15:14-17)
  24. What verse teaches us to harmonize all truth? (MT 4:4&7)
  25. What verse teaches us to be ready to witness? (1PT 3:15)
  26. Who are biblical Catholics? (EPH 1:13, 2:19-22, 3:6&10)
  27. Who are Orthodox? (EPH 4:14-15, kerygma vs. heresy)