Chris Jepson decided to take another shot at God in his March 4th column, “Satan as a Card Dealer,” in the Observer (16) by exalting Satan. He quotes from Samuel Butler who appears to lament that God has written all the books and that mankind has only heard one side of the story. God has written a Book, a perennial bestseller; but Satan discourages people from reading it. Just as the present Trudy left with Adrian Monk, the contents cannot help until the Gift is opened.
The devil can in no way match God’s power, as will become evident when he is cast into the lake of fire, where he will be joined by the unbelieving (no names, please). He does do a great amount of damage, however. He was the first to realize and act upon the idea that free will carries with it the opportunity to do good (obey God) or to do evil (rebel against God). Obviously, if everyone had chosen loving obedience, we would not be lost and in need of a Savior or redemption.
Epicurus’ error has been answered many times, but some have not read those books, either. A diet of skepticism seldom yields wisdom. Could God prevent evil? He could—but only at the expense of free will. Is God able to prevent evil but unwilling to do so? Yes. If He prevented all evil now, what choices would mankind have? Epicurus and Jepson have confused earth with heaven; no evil will exist there. Those who dwell there forever will have made the choice to enjoy a sin-free environment.
God is not malevolent to allow the existence of evil. This conclusion rests upon false premises. First, if God eradicated all evil the moment it took the form of a thought (and He does know all thoughts), even before it could express itself as an action, then the devil would have been destroyed immediately and not allowed to influence either the other angels or people over the centuries.
Second, most of us would likewise be gone for the same reason. If even one thought contrary to the will of God were enough to bring about our eradication, we would all have been destroyed and thus not be having this conversation. Third, if God removed all people immediately upon them entertaining a rebellious thought, where would be the opportunity for salvation? No one would ever have a chance to repent or to learn from mistakes—not if we were immediately expunged from the earth for our transgressions.
Our freedom to rebel against God of necessity allows for evil to exist; His patience permits us to see our errors and make positive changes. God did not create evil, but in granting free will, He allowed for its possibility. God is not surprised about man’s choices, and He did know from the beginning what man’s choices would be. For that reason Jesus was slain from the foundation of the world. God too has paid an enormous price for allowing us freedom.
Satan
Is Satan a mere “fall guy”? The devil has never made anyone sin, but he does know how to manipulate, spin, twist, and distort circumstances to his own advantage. He is a master at exploiting our weaknesses. His skills in making sin look attractive are unsurpassed, but we are still drawn away by our own lusts. He enjoys being a stumbling block, but the decision remains ours to make.
Mark Twain was a brilliant humorist, but he was wrong about God and the devil. Did he say with a straight face that Satan “hasn’t a single salaried helper”? Really? Do those who traffic in illegal drugs that spread misery to all of us do it for free? Are there no paychecks for those in Hollywood who encourage young people to use crude speech and engage in acts of fornication? Sin ministries are big business. Even writers of books and newspaper columnists have been known to have received remuneration for their efforts.
Many of those employed by the “Opposition” are undercover agents for the enemy. As the old story goes, a man was on the way to a costume party dressed as what many people imagine the devil to look like (orange suit, horns, trident tail). A sudden storm arose, and he ran for cover from the rain. He slipped into a church building just as lightning struck and the power flickered. People suddenly saw him and began to scream and scatter—except for one elderly man, who stood his ground and confided, “I just want you to know that I’ve been a member of this church for forty years, but I’ve been on your side the whole time.” Some of those supposedly employed by God have now championed fornication, adultery, and many other sins—contrary to the Word of the One they are allegedly serving.
This being the case, those who want to know God should read the Book He wrote instead of listening to those who claim to represent Him. Those in Berea did not take even the Apostle Paul’s preaching as truth until they searched and found that it harmonized with what the Scriptures taught (Acts 17:11). Paul also encouraged brethren to prove or test all things (1 Thess. 5:21-22).
Even the majority of those who hold a pro-life position would not require that a woman risk her life to give birth. Not all who believe in the value and the sanctity of human life are Catholic, and not all Catholics would disagree with what was done in protecting the life of the 9-year-old, Brazilian girl Jepson described. Lumping all or even most religious leaders together with the one he cited is nothing more than the logical fallacy of “hasty generalization,” concerning which Jepson is surely aware. Talk about stacking the deck!
A DISGRACE IN IOWA
Randy Robinson
Almost two weeks ago, on February 16, an absolute disgrace took place in the state of Iowa. More than 160 members of the “clergy,” presented a letter to the Iowa Legislature expressing their support for “same-sex marriage.” Last spring, the Iowa Supreme Court overturned a state law banning these ungodly unions. While a clear majority of the citizens of the state of Iowa are correctly opposed to this abomination and have urged their legislature to craft a constitutional amendment that would again ban such unions, unfortunately the legislature, consisting of Democrat majorities in both houses, have resisted these calls to act.
The issue of why these people should not be referred to as “clergy” is one to discuss on another occasion, as is why women should not seek nor be placed in positions of leadership pertaining to religious matters. The denominations represented here are all illegitimate. The Lord Jesus did not die for a single one of them. There were about a dozen different denominations represented here, with the United Church of Christ leading with twenty-six signatures. The UCC has been confused by some with the churches of Christ, but they could not be more different. Twenty Lutherans, nineteen Methodists, twelve Episcopalians, and ten Presbyterians all affixed their signatures to this letter. Also notable were seven members of the Christian church, as well as four Jewish rabbis and even one Catholic priest.
Churches of Christ and the Christian Church at one time were united, until those brethren began to embrace unscriptural practices and doctrines. The breach was so severe that they split at the turn of the 20th century and at this point, there is no difference between them and any other unauthorized denomination. They have abandoned Biblical authority on nearly every significant issue that has arisen.
When a true New Testament Christian reads this letter, it will undoubtedly produce a sense of outrage (as it did with this writer). For space considerations, we cannot reproduce the entire letter, but there are some significant points that should be addressed.
First—they claim that their motivation for writing this letter is based on “fairness.” This is simply unmitigated gall to the ultimate degree. These people, despite their education and background, have fallen prey to the misconception that marriage is a right. While marriage may be a right under civil law (that is, those who comply with the laws of their particular state cannot be prohibited from being married), from God’s perspective, marriage has always been a privilege. Marriage is for those who are eligible.
To be eligible for marriage, one must: 1) have never married; 2) be Scripturally divorced, there being only one Scriptural reason for divorce—fornication (Matt. 19:9); or 3) be widowed (Rom. 7:1-4). God ordained marriage in the Garden of Eden when He formed the woman from the rib of man and, brought her unto the man (Gen. 2:22). We then read this statement which epitomizes the institution of marriage:
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh (v.24).
To imply that the denial of any union other than this God-ordained union is somehow “unfair” is to accuse God of being unfair, which He most certainly is not (Ezek. 18:29).
Second—they “oppose the use of sacred texts and religious traditions to deny equal protection and responsibility under the law for gay and lesbian couples.” Again, the temerity of these people is astounding! There is only one “sacred text.” God’s Word—the Bible is the only one. Religious traditions established by human beings are irrelevant and meaningless. In essence, they are saying, “How dare anyone quote from the Bible Scriptures that would oppose what we want to see implemented?” The arrogance manifested here is unbelievable! They believe themselves to be so intelligent and so enlightened. They put themselves and their high and mighty opinions above the Bible and are offended by what the Bible says on this subject.
Third—they make the following affirmation which has no basis whatsoever except again—it is merely their opinion. They say: “Moreover, as many faith traditions affirm, where there is love, the sacred is in our midst.” Where does that come from? The simple answer is: from mere human wisdom. God certainly never said any such thing, nor did the Lord Jesus Christ—nor yet any of the inspired writers of the Bible.
Jesus did say: “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20). However, the context of that statement has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Jesus also declared that those who love Him would keep His words and that He and the Father would make their abode with them (John 14:23). Again, however, there is a condition to be met. One must be obedient to God’s Word—not in rebellion against it. Sin is the reason Jesus died upon the cross and homosexuality IS sin (Lev. 18:22; Rom. 1:26-27; Jude 7). Note what the Scriptures say about the difference between human wisdom and divine wisdom:
Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? (1 Cor. 1:20).
Fourth—they say, “We affirm freedom of conscience in this matter.” Since when has conscience ever been the appropriate guide? Not everyone’s conscience functions properly. Paul described those who propagated false doctrine and acted hypocritically as “having their conscience seared with a hot iron” (1 Tim. 4:2). In other words, they had no qualms at all about doing these things. Some people are able to dismiss pangs of conscientiousness to do whatever they please. Therefore, the conscience is not always a reliable guide. The apostle Paul boldly declared that he “had lived in all good conscience before God until this day” (Acts 23:1). Yet Paul also acknowledged that he was “chief” among sinners (1 Tim. 1:15) because he had been “a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious” [to the church] (v.13). Paul’s conscience allowed him to persecute Christians because he sincerely believed that he was pleasing God in doing so, yet he was wrong!
While we do not deny that some men exhibit certain feminine characteristics and some women exhibit certain masculine characteristics (and there may even be a strong attraction to members of the same sex), that does not excuse the practice of homosexuality. This idea comes from the erroneous presumption that we may exercise any sexual practice that we desire. However, God designed the sexual relationship to exist only between a married couple (one male and one female) (Heb. 13:4). All other such relationships are forbidden and constitute sin.
Also, the idea that people are born this way is preposterous. That presumes that God created them in such a way as to put them in the path of temptation and, as we have recently noted, God is not the source of temptation (Jam. 1:13). Furthermore, there have been numerous instances of people who have practiced homosexuality but no longer do so for a variety of reasons. These supposedly religious people of Iowa have disgraced themselves and their state and have chosen to defy Almighty God. The consequences for such defiance will be certain, severe, and eternal.
—The Richwood Reaper (February 28, 2010)
AVATAR
Last Saturday evening our youth group discussed the movie Avatar. Everyone has agreed that the special effects are outstanding; so I asked the question of the group (most of whom had seen the movie): “What was wrong with the movie? Several answers were given.
1. Much of the clothing was immodest. This criticism was valid; the costuming was brief for both men and women.
2. Another complaint was of a sexually suggestive scene.
3. The language was both blasphemous and profane. Shortly into the movie came the offensive expression God _____. Later the name of Jesus was also used in vain. Besides these were a host of other words, all of which violate Ephesians 4:29. When asked why they put these types of words into the movie, the youth suggested: a) The movie producers don’t see any problem with it; b) They think it’s funny; c) They think it makes the characters look more angry; d) They think it makes the characters look “cool.” e) The scriptwriters lack sufficient vocabulary skills.
4. Asked who was the movie’s hero (in addition to a few individual characters), the answer seemed to be Eywa, the (New Age) god (or goddess) of the planet.
5. The villain was the military specifically and human beings in particular (even though human beings rescued the planet Pandora).
6. It was also pointed out that a rite of passage was termed as “being born twice.”
These were excellent observations; sometimes, in the course of watching such a movie, one gets carried away with the special effects and does not realize some of the subtle (and not-so-subtle) underlying themes or messages. Avatar is a movie containing immodest clothing, corrupt and blasphemous language, that exalts a kind of New Age, Gaia goddess mentality, while denigrating the military.
The one difficult question to answer follows: Knowing that this film would appeal mostly to teens, why did James Cameron fill it with gratuitous vile speech, irreverence toward God, and the rest? What do you think?