Category: morality

Part 2: Moral Clarity in an Age of Antiheroes (continued)

Today’s society has adopted what the prophet decried: a deliberate shift in moral values. Our entertainment industry, educational institutions, and even certain religious circles increasingly emphasize personal comfort instead of moral integrity and individual authenticity, rather than divine guidance.

Brent Pollard

The Prophetic Warning Against Moral Relativism

In Isaiah 5.20, the warning critiques ancient Israel, denouncing any culture that forsakes divine moral truths. The Hebrew term hoy, meaning “woe,” indicates not just mild concern but a declaration of divine condemnation for those who knowingly distort the moral standards established by God.

Recognizing this context underscores Isaiah’s significance in contemporary entertainment and politics. Similar to how the Judeans rationalized their departure from God’s laws, our society creates complex narratives that validate ethical compromises. The reasoning that caused them to modify their moral standards now encourages us to admire fictional characters who engage in theft, deception, criminal partnerships, or political movements that justify violence as a form of justice.

Today’s society has adopted what the prophet decried: a deliberate shift in moral values. Our entertainment industry, educational institutions, and even certain religious circles increasingly emphasize personal comfort instead of moral integrity and individual authenticity, rather than divine guidance.

The Scripture’s Unwavering Standard

The New Testament reinforces Isaiah’s message. Romans 1.32 warns that those who practice sin “also give hearty approval to those who practice them.” 1 John 3.4 adds, “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” The Greek anomia indicates a deep rejection of divine authority.

When society praises those who defy moral law, it fosters chaos and rebellion. No matter how admirable their intentions may seem, God condemns their deeds.

The Antihero Deception: A Pattern Throughout History

Individuals who defy societal norms for “noble” causes have been lauded throughout history—from Robin Hood and Batman to contemporary antiheroes like Disney’s Ironheart. She constructs her suit using stolen technology and collaborates with criminal organizations to achieve her objectives. Additionally, her character is portrayed as bisexual, a choice that mirrors the cultural agenda.

This highlights a more profound concern: the notion that good intentions can excuse immoral behavior. However, Scripture disagrees. Theft is still considered stealing (Exodus 20.15). Violence is inherently wrong (Matthew 26.52). Corrupt partnerships taint ethical values (1 Corinthians 15.33).

We must not confuse love with chaos. God’s law is rooted in love, and genuine compassion does not justify sin.

The Dangers of Celebrating Moral Compromise

Societies that glorify morally ambiguous figures participate in cultural catechism. This teaching influences hearts and minds with significant repercussions:

  • Moral Absolutes Decay: Entertainment or activism that makes exceptions to God’s commands undermines the concept of absolute truth.
  • Pragmatism Replaces Principle: Compliance is no longer mandatory when outcomes justify actions.
  • Resistance to Authority: Antiheroes frequently succeed by challenging authority, prompting viewers to scrutinize all types of it, including divine authority (Romans 1:18ff).

Scripture provides counterexamples. David refused to kill Saul, even when he could have justified it, since Saul sought to kill him (1 Samuel 24.6). Jesus rebuked Peter for drawing a sword in His defense (Matthew 26.52).

The Authority of Scripture vs. Cultural Trends

We must maintain the authority of the Bible (2 Timothy 3.16-17). This obligation stems from principle rather than tradition. We evaluate cultural trends through Scripture, rather than assessing Scripture against cultural norms.

Peter warned that mockers would pursue their desires (2 Peter 3.3). Likewise, Paul cautioned Timothy about individuals who would turn away from sound doctrine in favor of what satisfies them (2 Timothy 4.2–3).

Teaching Moral Discernment

Christian parents should instruct their children to evaluate media from a biblical perspective. Consider:

  • Is this character committed to following God’s commands regardless of the circumstances?
  • Are sinful acts being celebrated?
  • What if everyone followed this character’s moral logic?

Modeling Consistent Ethics

Children gain the most insights from their parents’ examples. If we justify our minor faults while criticizing similar behaviors in others, we convey that moral standards can be adjusted.

James 1.22 urges us to be doers of the word. That includes how we consume entertainment and participate in politics.

Providing Positive Alternatives

Don’t just say what’s wrong; point to what’s right. Scripture presents heroes who remained faithful under pressure:

  • Daniel in the lion’s den (Daniel 6)
  • Joseph, tempted yet faithful (Genesis 39)
  • Hebrew midwives, who feared God more than Pharaoh (Exodus 1.17)

These individuals suggest that following righteousness may require sacrifices, which is always rewarding.

The Church’s Role

The church must be a prophetic voice. Like Isaiah, we declare “woe” to moral confusion from a place of spiritual integrity, not political power.

Early Christians transformed Rome not through political activism but by living the Gospel (Acts 17.6). So must we.

Conclusion: Holding Fast to Truth

Paul’s charge remains: “Guard… the treasure which has been entrusted to you” (2 Timothy 1.14).

We should not adjust the Bible to fit contemporary views. Instead, we present the truth with love, even if it’s not well-received.

By upholding moral integrity in our heroes, we instill in the next generation the importance of righteousness. Though this narrow path is challenging, it ultimately leads to eternal life (Matthew 7.14).

Part 1: Moral Clarity in an Age of Antiheroes

To accurately understand Isaiah 5.20 against the backdrop of modern moral ambiguity, it is crucial to comprehend its original historical and literary context…

Brent Pollard

Text: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” — Isaiah 5.20

Expository Background: The Context of Isaiah 5.20

To accurately understand Isaiah 5.20 against the backdrop of modern moral ambiguity, it is crucial to comprehend its original historical and literary context. The prophet Isaiah shared his prophecies during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, a timeframe of around 740–686 BC. Concurrently, the kingdom of Judah experienced both material prosperity and a concerning spiritual decline.

The Literary Structure of Isaiah 5

Isaiah 5 opens with the famous “Song of the Vineyard” (vv. 1–7), in which God compares Israel to a carefully tended vineyard that produced sour grapes instead of the anticipated good fruit. The vineyard represents the chosen community, whereas the wild grapes symbolize their moral decline, despite being bestowed with plentiful spiritual blessings.

Following this parable, Isaiah announces six “woes” (vv. 8–23) that clearly illustrate how Israel has produced these “wild grapes.” Each lament tackles a particular transgression that had become prevalent in Judean society:

  1. An insatiable craving for acquiring land and possessions (vv. 8–10)
  2. A state of intoxication coupled with a lack of spiritual enthusiasm (vv. 11–17)
  3. Intentional misconduct and ridicule of the sacred (vv. 18–19)
  4. Labeling what is evil as good and vice versa (v. 20)
  5. Excessive pride and unwarranted confidence (v. 21)
  6. Corrupt authority and injustice (vv. 22–23)

The Specific Context of Verse 20

The fourth woe (verse 20) is essential in this list, underscoring its significance. The Hebrew phrasing employs four parallel clauses that form a chiastic, or mirrored, structure:

  • A: “those who call evil good”
  • B: “and good evil”
  • B’: “who substitute darkness for light”
  • A’: “and light for darkness”

This literary device underscores the significant shift in moral standards that occurred in Judean society. The messenger does not reflect accidental ethical ambiguity but rather an intentional and systematic inversion of the divine order established by the Creator.

Historical Circumstances

Archaeological evidence and scriptural records suggest that the land of Judah faced significant social unrest in the eighth century. While wealth increased and an elite class emerged, many people suffered from poverty and oppression. The political alliances of that era required concessions to the customs and beliefs of non-believing nations.

Crucially, in Judea, society developed complex justifications for actions that clearly violated divine laws. The wealthy justified their mistreatment of the poor as vital for economic growth. Religious leaders conformed to local customs to maintain political ties. Social elites altered moral standards to fit their personal goals.

Isaiah 5:20 specifically highlights the changing perspectives on morality within both intellectual and cultural contexts. The Hebrew verb amar, meaning “call,” suggests more than just a personal viewpoint; it denotes an authoritative pronouncement—key individuals were reshaping society’s moral discourse.

Theological Principles for Application

Several hermeneutical principles enable the legitimate application of Isaiah 5:20 to modern contexts:

  1. Divine moral standards are universal: The distinctions upheld by Isaiah testify to God’s immutable nature. What God deems wicked in one age remains wicked throughout all ages.
  2. Patterns of Betrayal in the Covenant: Though we do not belong to ethnic Israel, the New Testament recognizes the church as Israel’s spiritual counterpart (Galatians 6:16; 1 Peter 2:9).
  3. The Influence of Culture on Moral Understanding: Isaiah’s message targets the broader evolution of societal ethical standards, making his warnings perpetually relevant.
  4. The Weight of Leadership Endures: Isaiah’s woes address influential figures who shaped public values. Today, spiritual leaders bear a similar responsibility.

When Strength Fails:

The Seduction, Humiliation, and Redemption of Samson

Brent Pollard

Samson’s story is both tragic and compelling. God predestined Samson to deliver Israel from the oppression of the Philistines, naming him a Nazarite before his conception. Despite his unimaginable strength, this judge succumbed to his desires, particularly his attraction to Philistine women. Samson was enticed, degraded, and finally felt a deep sense of reclaiming himself. The story of Samson’s descent and ultimate resilience is a powerful reminder that grace can lift us back up no matter how deep our struggles are.

Seduced by the Enemy (Judges 16.1-20)

Samson’s decline was not a sudden event but a gradual unraveling of his sense of purpose. Samson consistently broke his promises despite his dedication as a Nazirite, chosen for divine purpose. He became involved with three Philistine women: his wife from Timnah (Judges 14), a woman of ill repute from Gaza (Judges 16.1), and Delilah (Judges 16.4). It was with Delilah that he met his downfall. Despite her undeniable loyalty to the Philistines and her persistent efforts to unravel the mystery of his power, Samson eventually succumbed:

“So he told her all that was in his heart…” (Judges 16.17 NASB95)

In that moment of revealing his truth, Samson gave up his secret and the essence of his power. His assailants apprehended him, blinded him, and imprisoned him within that darkness. Samson learned that temptation rarely announces itself as destructive. Likewise, we gradually forfeit our strength and clarity when we flirt with sin. Samson lost his power because he gave his heart to the wrong person, a lesson that still resonates today and underscores the importance of discernment in our lives. However, the consequences of his misplaced trust would go far beyond losing his strength, plunging him into literal and spiritual darkness.

Humiliated by His Choices (Judges 16.21–25)

With his vision and power removed, Samson became a captive, grinding grain in a Philistine prison. However, his degradation reached new heights when the Philistines paraded him before the crowd at a festival, reveling in their mockery.

“Call for Samson, that he may amuse us.” (Judges 16.25 NASB95)

This summons wasn’t just to satisfy curiosity. The Hebrew term translated as “make sport” in the KJV conveys connotations of mockery, contempt, and possibly even sexual humiliation. This latter possibility is reflected in Potiphar’s wife’s use of this Hebrew word as she falsely accuses Joseph of attempted rape. She said Joseph was trying “to make sport of us” (Genesis 39.14 NASB). Given Samson’s infamous history with Philistine women, one can imagine their scornful laughter at his abasement, viewing it as appropriate retribution: the great warrior of Israel brought low, not by a clash of arms, but by the tender yet treacherous nature of love. In a tragic turn of events, Samson was reduced to a mere trophy, displayed to entertain a reveling crowd who joyfully worshipped their deity, Dagon.

Public transgressions frequently cause public shame. When reality reveals the consequences, what once thrilled us in solitude may become a source of scorn. Regardless of their disgrace, the Lord does not abandon repentant people. And it was only in the depths of his humiliation, chained between the pillars of the Philistine temple, that Samson realized this truth for himself.

Redeemed by Grace (Judges 16.26–30)

Blind, broken, and mocked—Samson finally cried out to God:

“O Lord God, please remember me and please strengthen me just this time…” (Judges 16.28 NASB95)

This prayer signified a watershed moment. In a moment of deep reflection, Samson summoned the courage to bow before the divine, shedding the burden of his former pride. In a moment of divine intervention, God answered Samson’s plea, and with a surge of newfound power, he toppled Dagon’s temple, taking more lives in his final act than he had throughout his entire life (Judges 16.30). This act of destruction was not a sign of Samson’s fall but a testament to his resilience. Despite his journey ending prematurely, it reached a pinnacle of resilience and spiritual strength. In Hebrews 11.32, Samson is among the revered figures honored for their unwavering faith.

Samson’s redemption journey powerfully reminds us that even broken people can still serve a purpose. He is not the God of flawless credentials but of contrite souls. When we return to Him, He can renew us even after stumbling.

Conclusion

Ultimately, Samson’s story is a cautionary tale about the dangers of succumbing to temptation and offers hope for redemption. His seduction and disgrace were undeniable, but his redemption was also evident. If you’ve felt you’ve stumbled through missteps, struggles, broken connections, or poor choices, know that your journey is far from over. There is a God who hears the cries of the weary and offers a hand of hope for redemption.

“My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” (2 Corinthians 12.9 NASB95)

Morality Sans Religion

Gary Pollard

Carl sourced several of the most commonly asked questions and gave me 70 of them to write about. So I’ll try to tackle a question or three every week for a while (or until something more interesting grabs my attention). This week’s question is, “Is it possible to make moral decisions without religion?” It’s somewhat related to an article I wrote a few weeks ago, but seemed different enough to warrant its own article. 

There’s a simple answer, but with some nuance. Is it possible for a person who isn’t religious to make moral decisions? Absolutely. But is it possible for good morality to exist without God? Absolutely not. More on that in a minute. 

“Religion” is a very broad word. It involves anything a person or group of people worship — this could be an inanimate object, a set of ideas, a charismatic individual, a supernatural entity, certain forces of nature, or even cosmic features. It’s anything a person deems “higher” than self and worth giving some kind of respect and adoration to. 

Not all religions are created equal. Some call for harming others who aren’t in that same belief system. Some are in place solely to justify self-indulgent behavior. Some use religion to gain power over others and/or wealth. Some exist only to maintain cultural cohesion and national identity (a “state” religion). A person’s religion ultimately comes from one of two sources: God, or the powers that influence this world. 

Judeo-Christian teachings have benefited society in innumerable ways. They lifted much of the world out of poverty. They promoted peace among all people. Selfless love, sacrifice for the good of someone else, love for enemies, care for the vulnerable, and judicial integrity are just some of the ways Christianity has improved the inhabited world. Many will respond with, “But what about the Crusades? What about the many atrocities committed in the name of Christianity?” Those weren’t Christians. They may have claimed to be, but they absolutely were not. Claiming to be something and actually representing its teachings are two different things. 

How often have we heard a political figure or commentator say something like, “I’m conservative, but…” right before promoting something not remotely conservative? They’re not actually conservative. More appropriately, how often have we heard someone say, “I love Jesus, but I’ll (insert hateful words/actions here)”? They claim Jesus, but they aren’t Christians. Anyone can tell who a legit Christian is by how well they practice selfless love and genuine belief in God (cf. I Jn 4). 

The moralities of pagan cultures never held up to time well. The nihilistic hedonism they invariably devolved into destroyed them from the inside out. When everyone is primarily concerned with their own “happiness” and feeding their desires, someone has to pay. When a person’s happiness is the greatest societal good, it has to come at someone else’s expense. There were certainly attempts to keep this in check, especially by unifying around a pantheon or series of social norms (or both). But they, too, usually devolved into hedonism. 

Jesus’s teachings were unique in that they posited two necessities, both built on selfless love: for God, for every human. Justice was to be handled by government, even if that government was corrupt. Christians understood that nothing was more important than showing love to others, even if it cost them health, safety, or their lives. They understood that other people always come first. They understood that genuine, meaningful happiness wouldn’t be attainable in this life. Inner peace was certainly attainable with God’s help, but satiating self was never the way to do that.  

The bottom line is this: a person whose worldview is even loosely based on the ethics God gave humanity can make moral decisions without being religious. But this is only really possible in a society with a noticeable percentage of people who believe in God and try to act like it. Rarely do we see that kind of morality in a religious vacuum. Most people instinctively know that killing someone for fun is bad, but not all. But that’s literally the bare minimum of what makes a decent person (we’ll even include other big ones here like rape, kidnapping, etc.). What about making sure you don’t get rich by taking advantage of other people in some way? What about not influencing or enabling others to make decisions that would harm them in the future? What about being absolutely faithful to your spouse (unassailably the most functional domestic condition)? What about always telling the truth, even if it harms you? What about forgiving people who hurt you, and definitely not retaliating? These are not natural character traits, these are the behaviors of people who believe in God and try to love others selflessly. 

So yes, it is possible for a person to be moral without being religious…but not outside of a framework built on God’s morality. Genuine Christian morality promotes a culture where the least amount of people are harmed, allowing for the most amount of people tolive fulfilling, meaningful lives. 

Absolutely Subjective

Gary Pollard

Carl sourced several of the most commonly asked questions and gave me 70 of them to write about. So I’ll try to tackle a question or three every week for a while (or until something more interesting grabs my attention). This week’s question is, “Are all morals absolute? Where does morality come from?”

Morality concerns itself with the difference between right and wrong. Some things are always wrong: murder, sexual sin, theft, neglecting people in need, etc.

But are all morals absolute? 

Some things are wrong, but forgivable. Jesus used David as an example of this. Leviticus 24.9 said that a special kind of bread was for “Aaron’s descendants only.” In I Samuel, David (left with no other options) ate that bread. This was a sin. Jesus used this incident to prove God’s desire for “mercy over sacrifice” (cf. Mt 12.5-7). Rahab flat out lied about keeping Israelite spies in her home, but was praised as an example of faith because of her actions (Hb 11.31). Then, of course, there’s I John 5.16-17: There’s a type of sin that doesn’t lead to death, and a type that does.

The Bible also teaches — unambiguously — that some things are wrong for some people, and not wrong for others (Rom 14.23; I Cor 8.7-8). The message of those texts is: 1. “Keep your beliefs about these things a secret between you and God, because it’s a blessing to be able to do what you think is right without feeling guilty” (Rom 14.22). 2. “Never do anything that would cause a weaker Christian to mess up” (Rom 14.13, I Cor 8.9, cf. Mt 18.7). 

Where does humanity’s sense of right and wrong come from? 

Some things are self-evident to most people. Most people understand that killing someone for no good reason is morally wrong. Most people understand that taking something that belongs to someone else is wrong. Not everyone is this regulated, though — I Timothy 1.9 says that the law was made for people inclined to harm others. 

On the flip side, “sin gets its power from law” (I Cor 15.56, Rom 3.20, 5.20, 7.7-8), so we should be careful not to emphasize the regulation side of Christianity with people who are generally inclined to do the right thing. 

But some things are not second nature. Not everyone understands that chasing happiness (which is often conflated with euphoria, pleasure, and dopamine) at the expense of someone else’s character or feelings is wrong. Fornication and adultery fall into this category. There are many (often understandable) reasons someone might fall for these, but none of them are ultimately justifiable. Not everyone understands that ordering their lives around anything other than God, or giving immense adoration and respect to a human over God, is wrong (this is idolatry). Our understanding of what is morally right in these (and other related) areas comes from God. 

God’s standard of what’s right has always existed to benefit humanity, prevent abuse of the vulnerable, to give us the most fulfilling life here, and to make us eligible for rescue when Jesus returns. Morality is an extension of God’s existence. It is the first and last line of defense against darkness. This Earth is still around, so bad people and bad things still exist. God gave us a standard of right and wrong that we can’t always live up to, and that’s where grace comes in. But some things are always very wrong and can’t be practiced by anyone who wants to live forever. 

Responding To The Purge

Friday’s Column: Supplemental Strength

brent 2020

Brent Pollard

I rarely watch television. I find most programming today unimaginative (e.g. reboots) and fraught with immorality. When I do watch something, it’s likely a sporting event, home improvement show, or vintage sitcom. As I was catching a few minutes of a classic sitcom, my dad remarked that one of the actresses on screen died from cancer during the run of the show. Curious, I looked up information about the show on the internet. In so doing, I encountered a curious expression: “rural purge.”

In 1970, American broadcasters, particularly CBS, put the ax to lighthearted, rural-themed and folksy shows then airing on TV in favor of more socially progressive urban and suburban-set shows. Pat Buttram, the actor who played the role of “Mr. Haney” on Green Acres, is quoted by Ken Berry as saying of the rural purge “It was the year CBS killed everything with a tree in it.” 1  Ken Berry thought that CBS was tired of being teased as the “Country Broadcasting System” since they perceived themselves as the “Tiffany Network” because of their vaunted news division. 2 It had been the executive in charge of programming at CBS who was tired of the shows and canceled them despite their good Nielsen ratings. The absence of family-friendly fare did not go unnoticed by the public, including even politicians like President Nixon. 3

The “rural purge” suggests several Biblical points to me. First, it demonstrates an unfortunate characteristic of fallen human nature that the proven (and wholesome) is often dumped for something else simply because of its “novelty.” God noted this was likewise true in Jeremiah’s day. When He advised them to take the established path, they refused (Jeremiah 6.16). They preferred their new, idolatrous way.

Second, it shows us why leadership matters. Paul warned the coming apostasy would begin with the elders (Acts 20.29-30.) I am mindful of congregations about which I’ve read in some of our brotherhood publications where the Biblical pattern was changed after the elders “reconsidered an issue prayerfully.” The sheep who know that their shepherds are leading them astray are left with a dilemma. Despite nothing being wrong previously, changes were foisted upon them by the leadership. Their family is changed. What will they do?

Lastly, it shows the importance of perseverance.

As the “rural purge” continued, there arose an anomaly. To placate the aforementioned public complaints, CBS reluctantly greenlighted a Christmas special based on a story by Earl Hamner, Jr. They purposely pitted it against popular shows on other networks they felt would crush their program! It didn’t. It was such a hit that CBS had no choice but to develop it into a new series that would run for 9 seasons. The Waltons. Because people refused to give up and give in to whims of the programing executive at CBS, a renaissance of family-friendly programs on all networks began.

Sometimes we feel as if our efforts are wasted, especially when it comes to our sinful culture. However, we are told that our labor is not in vain in the Lord. So, we are exhorted to remain steadfast (1 Corinthians 15.58). God ensures that His Word doesn’t return void and gives increase when faithfully spoken (Isaiah 55.11; 1 Corinthians 3.5-7). Therefore, let us stand and let our voices be heard, even if we find ourselves amid a “Christian purge.”

 

References

1 “Television Academy Interviews.” Television Academy Interviews, Television Academy, 22 Feb. 2019, interviews.televisionacademy.com/interviews/ken-berry?clip=60761#highlight-clips.

2 ibid

3 “Rural Purge.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 12 Feb. 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_purge.

516px-waltons_1972

“You Can Find Somebody To Tell You What You Want To Hear”

Neal Pollard

Someone wants to be involved in an illicit relationship, defend an unscriptural marriage (or enter into one), engage in some vice or sinful behavior “in moderation” (or otherwise), and they talk to someone who shows them from scripture why it should not be done. Perhaps they ask several people and get the same discouragement. Sometimes, the inquirer is wise enough to let that guide them away from wrongdoing. Other times, they persist in looking for someone to tell them what they want to hear. Without exception, such a searcher will eventually—and probably sooner than later—find someone to validate and endorse their desire.

Solomon wrote, “The thoughts of the righteous are just, But the counsels of the wicked are deceitful” (Prov. 12:5). His father kicked off the songbook of Israel by saying, “How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked…” (Psa. 1:1a). Job speaks of how he shunned “the counsel of the wicked” (Job 21:16; 22:18). Wicked Ahaziah was rejected by God, in part, “for his mother was his counselor to do wickedly” (2 Chr. 22:3).  This characteristic of human nature, whether giving or taking wicked counsel, is timeless. But, seeking counsel from the proper sources is encouraged by Scripture (Prov. 11:14; 15:22; 24:6). How can we make sure that we are hearing what we need to hear, not just what we want to hear?

  • We must realize our personal accountability (2 Cor. 5:10). No matter what anyone else tells us, we’ll stand individually in the Judgment. Christ’s word, as Judge, is the only one that ultimately matters. What has He said?
  • We must pray for wisdom and discernment (Col. 1:9). Are we ignoring a pricked conscience, clear teaching, or red flags? Is self in control, or is the Savior’s will?
  • We must grow in knowledge (2 Pet. 3:18).  Have we studied this out yet? Are we convinced beyond a doubt? What does the Lord say?
  • We must be honest with ourselves (Psa. 15:2). We cannot deal fairly in any situation if we’re deceiving ourselves. Lying to ourselves does not change God’s truth. It simply hurts us.
  • We must train our hearts to desire what is good (cf. 2 Pet. 2:14). This can be excruciatingly hard! Proverbs 21:10 says, “The soul of the wicked desires evil.” But listen to a cleansed heart: “Behold, You desire truth in the innermost being, and in the hidden part You will make me know wisdom” (Psa. 51:6).
  • We must put emphasis on the eternal rather than the temporary (2 Cor. 4:16ff). Is what we wish to pursue destructive to heavenly objectives? Are we risking an eternity in heaven for a few years of fleeting pleasure on earth? Nothing is worth sacrificing salvation!
  • We must weigh the advice of our counselors on the scales of truth (Prov. 18:17). The Berean Christians fact-checked an inspired apostle (Acts 17:6). We owe it to ourselves to compare what our advisers tell us—however much we love and respect them—with what God’s Word says. Many times they will align. If they do not, we must choose God’s Word every time!

Beware! At times, what we want to hear is right and good. Many times, it is not. As we lean on others, let us lean most heavily on “the rock” (Mat. 7:24)!

dreamstime_l_20586429

The Eye Of The Beholder

Neal Pollard

The theme of our recently completed lectureship was, “Every Man Did What Was Right In His Own Eyes.” This seems to be the summary statement of this entire period of Bible history. It is interesting that this idea shows up more than in just the two verses where the statement appears (Judges 17:6; 21:25). Samson wanted the woman of Timnah because “she looked good to” him (Judges 14:3,7; literally, “she was right in his eyes”). In reality, she was a loose, treacherous, and idolatrous woman, but she seemed right to him. In that dark story about the Levite man, the elderly Ephraimite man, the Levite’s concubine and the Ephraimite’s virgin daughter, the old man, seeking to placate the wicked Benjamites, offered the women to them “to do with them whatever” they wished (Judges 19:24; literally, “the good in your eyes”). Obviously, what was right in these men’s eyes was reprehensible and vile. It is one of the most extreme examples of wickedness recorded in the Bible.

Elsewhere, the Bible says, “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes” (Proverbs 12:15a), and “Every man’s way is right in his own eyes” (Proverbs 21:2a). We often think things seem right when they are far from it (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25; 18:17).  After talking about those who mix up right and wrong and good and evil, Isaiah tells us why they do this. He warns that they “are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight” (Isaiah 5:21).

In the world, the church, and our own lives, we are tempted to do what is right in our own eyes. We justify habits, relationships, desires, religious practices, lifestyles, and choices about which God warns in His Word by ignoring that and rationalizing, rewording, and reframing them. We use emotional arguments. We twist Scripture. In the end, when we do these things, we reject God’s authority and seek to become the standard ourselves. The book of Judges was written, in part, to show us what happens when we do it and how God feels when we do it.  The well-worn phrase goes, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” That may be. But right and wrong is not such as is in the eye of the beholder. That is determined by the One who possesses “the all-seeing eye” (Proverbs 15:3).

eye-211610_640

What Would YOU Do?

Neal Pollard

On the one hand, Brunhilde Pomsel says she knew nothing but on the other says she saw the “ranting, rowdy man,” the “raging midget” that her boss, Joseph Goebbels, could become. Though usually sophisticated and elegant, if arrogant, he was the propaganda minister for Hitler’s Nazi regime, culpable in the murder of millions of Jews and other Nazi targets, and she was his secretary. She’s 105-years-old and is the star of a documentary film, A German Life, set to be released soon (The Guardian, Kate Connelly, 8/15/16, “Joseph Goebbels’ 105-Year-Old Secretary: No One Believes Me Now, But I Knew Nothing”). One of her most poignant comments was this:  ““Those people nowadays who say they would have stood up against the Nazis – I believe they are sincere in meaning that, but believe me, most of them wouldn’t have.”

After the rise of the Nazi party, “the whole country was as if under a kind of a spell…”

Her point, even if uttered in rationalization, is pretty poignant. It’s so easy to look back on horrific actions like those perpetrated by the Nazi machine and say we’d die fighting it. But, the rank and file of the German people in the 1930s and 1940s were “normal” people. I’m sure it would have been possible for someone like Brunhilde to keep herself in a bubble from the truth, but I’m not sure it exonerates her. I’ve read too many books about so many who secretly and openly defied the evil of that fascist government to protect the innocent, especially the Jewish people.

One of history’s hardest challenges has been to go against the flow of culture and society. Scripture reveals some of those struggles, like faced by Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. Imagine facing the “rage and anger” of a ruthless king who demanded you to sin, and saying, “O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to give you an answer concerning this matter. If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the furnace of blazing fire; and He will deliver us out of your hand, O king. But even if He does not, let it be known to you, O king, that we are not going to serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up” (Dan. 3:17-18). Then imagine seeing him “filled with wrath, and his facial expression” being “altered” toward you. While the event was transformational for the king, they still needed the courage to be distinct in their times.

It is frightening to think of how our country has changed in such a relatively brief period of time. As morality erodes and attitudes toward God and the Bible change for the worse, we have opportunities to stand. The ruling powers may not seem as evil as Nazism does in the rearview mirror, but their hostility toward Christianity is becoming clearer. While we remain the respective, obedient citizens Scripture commands us to be (Rom. 13; 1 Pet. 2), let us be willing to stand with the likes of Peter and John and always say, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

brunhilde20pomsel20color

We Could Use More Fear

Neal Pollard

Maybe you are like me and reach a threshold where you just don’t want to see any more alerts, the latest, in-depth reports about terrorism and senseless violence and murder, and warnings of looming threats. At some point, most of us reach a saturation point. Many wish to avoid the news altogether for its depressing gloom and despair. I don’t believe we need to manufacture or reinforce that kind of fear. There is plenty of that.

However, there is a significant sense, globally, nationally, locally, and personally, where needed fear is insufficient or absent.

  • Fear That Shows Itself In Service To God (Josh. 24:14).
  • Fear That Motivates Obedience (1 Sam. 11:7).
  • Fear That Opens Our Minds To His Blessings (1 Sam. 12:24).
  • Fear That Ushers Praise  To God (Ps. 22:23).
  • Fear That Brings Wisdom (Ps. 111:10).
  • Fear That Results In Trusting God (Ps. 115:11).
  • Fear That Gives Rise To Blessings (Ps. 115:13).
  • Fear That Causes Knowledge (Pr. 1:7).
  • Fear That Leads To Hating Evil (Pr. 8:13).
  • Fear That Produces Confidence (Pr. 14:26).
  • Fear That Yields Life (Pr. 14:27).
  • Fear That Prompts A Departure From Evil (Pr. 16:6).
  • Fear That Focuses Us On Our Purpose On Earth (Ec. 12:13).
  • Fear That Makes All Ultimately Well For The “Fearers” (Ec. 8:12).
  • Fear That Proves Us Followers Of The Mind Of Christ (Is. 11:2-3).
  • Fear That Precipitates Stability In Our Times (Is. 33:6).
  • Fear That Makes God Show Mercy (Jer. 26:19).
  • Fear That Helps The Church Grow (Acts 9:31).

(There are literally dozens of other passages that speak of the benefits of this godly fear)

A lack of godly, reverent fear of God generates more than deadly attacks on innocent, defenseless people all over the world; it leads to people’s callous, wanton ungodliness that causes mothers to slaughter their unborn children, that hardens people in lifestyles of sin, sexual immorality, rank atheism and moral bankruptcy. The kind of fear that the Bible urges in every genre of Bible literature (history, poetry, prophesy, gospels, and epistles) is the pathway not only to peace, security, and joy on this earth, but eternal peace, security, and joy!  History is rife with examples of what happens in the presence and absence of such fear in the lives of individuals and whole societies.

In practical terms, that starts with you and me demonstrating and declaring the urgent necessity of such fear. It may mean watching less TV or less scouring of internet reports on the latest security threats and investing in more devotional time building dependency upon God to help us through these perilous times. Refocus and retrain your heart regarding the object of your fear! It is truly the gateway to fighting the fears that appear to plague humanity’s souls at the current hour.

fear-isnt-that-whats-blocking-your-blessings

The Holocaust: What Can Be In Men’s Hearts

Neal Pollard

Though mankind can construct a fantasy to explain our origin and propagate it in places like The Natural History Museum, we have a harder time skirting around our moral outrage at the atrocities committed by the Nazis from 1933 to 1945.  I made my third ever visit to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and, more than ever, I was dumbfounded at how anyone could perpetrate torture and treatment like the European Jews received at their hands.  Words like “wrong,” “immoral,” “evil,” “wicked,” and “barbaric” flow freely from the mouths of the visitors who see pictures or watch videos of the organized pogroms and the aftermath of the death cities they called concentration camps. Witnessing such depravity makes it easier to understand how men could take an innocent man like Jesus and be hardened enough to have Him crucified.  It also helps us appreciate how necessary that sacrifice was.

Hitler, if he worshipped anything, worshipped the occult.  He seemed not to truly acknowledge the existence of God, using His name only as a shield to defend his dictatorial policies.  His regime is an extreme example of what men, apart from God, are capable of doing.  With no sovereign standard to submit to and no transcendent truth to believe in, men become their own gods and write their own laws.  They so often do so without regard for the welfare and lives of other people.  They do as they please and what pleases them so often destroys them but also others.

Jesus warned of such a mindset in Luke 16, speaking to the Pharisees, saying, “You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God” (15).  He warned on another occasion that “what comes out of a man defiles a man” (Mark 7:20), including “evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, theft, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lewdness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, [and] foolishness” (21-22).  When men try to negate the nature of God and escape the existence of God, it leads to the perishing of people and the harm of humanity.  The answer is simple, if demanding: “‘Now, therefore,’ says the Lord, ‘Turn to Me with all your heart, With fasting, with weeping, and with mourning.’ So rend your heart, and not your garments; Return to the Lord your God, For He is gracious and merciful, Slow to anger, and of great kindness; And He relents from doing harm” (Joel 2:12-13).  Either way, it’s a matter of the heart! May our hearts get right and stay right.

Should We Let The Devil Make The Rules Of Engagement?

Neal Pollard

Thanks to the hospitality of my good friend, Jason Jackson, I had the opportunity to visit beautiful AT&T Park in San Francisco, witnessing a rarity (a Rockies win) against his beloved Giants.  It was LGBT Night at the old ballpark, an annual sponsorship of “SF Pride.” It was also the day of the historic Supreme Court decision mandating the recognition of same-sex marriage in all 50 states. The crowd was enthusiastic about that event in Washington, D.C., cheering when it was proclaimed over the P.A.  The videoboard featured gay and lesbian couples for its “kiss cam.”  While San Francisco is renowned for its “sexual progressiveness,” the city of Denver has earned a reputation for similar liberality of thought regarding homosexuality. In a growing number of places in our nation and especially among those under a certain age, there is welcoming, sanctioning language for homosexuality and vehement intolerance for the least word of condemnation of the behavior as sinfulness.  Even among those professing to be Christians, there is a changing posture in how or if it is dealt with.  Understanding that no sin is worse than any other, that it is not right to display an ungodly attitude in addressing any sin, and that there should not be an inordinate amount of time, attention, and energy given to any sin to the exclusion of the other, I wonder if even some of our Christian brothers and sisters have become unwitting pawns of the prince of this world regarding this matter.  The devil is at war against the Word and will of God, and he is at war against anyone loyal to such (Rom. 13:12; 2 Cor. 10:3-6; Eph. 6:10ff; etc.).  He wants his cause, the ultimate end of which is the spiritual destruction of all men, to succeed, and he wants the cause of Christ to be overthrown.  We know that his mission will ultimately fail, with there being those who are welcomed by our Lord to heaven (1 Cor. 15:24; Mat. 25:34-39). Yet, most will follow him to everlasting punishment and destruction (Mat. 25:41-46).  He has the bulk of the resources and influence of this world, as he almost always has had in every generation. He has powerfully allies and mouthpieces from Washington to Hollywood and most media and education outlets in between.

  • Who is behind the idea that we are not loving the sinner when we speak of homosexuality as sin?
  • Who would have us believe that we are mean-spirited or unrighteous if we use terms like “unnatural” (Rom. 1:26), “exceedingly grave sin” (Gen. 18:20), “ungodly” (2 Pet. 2:6), “gross immorality” and “going after strange flesh” (Jude 7) to describe homosexual behavior?
  • Who would sell us on the idea that loving the homosexual means keeping quiet about their practice of it, failing to warn them to repent (Ezek. 33:8)?
  • Who would seek to equate a behavioral choice (1 Cor. 6:9) with one’s race or skin color (Acts 17:26; Acts 10:34-35)?

What happened in our nation’s highest court last Friday may have been necessary to shake the church out of its general lethargy and indifference regarding evangelism.  What happened there will ultimately be overruled in the highest court there is (Mat. 25:31ff).  What happened there should not become our obsession, but neither are we wrong to take note of how this is a significant societal erosion.  Jesus implies how intolerable it would be for Sodom and Gomorrah at the Judgment (Mat. 10:15). The Lord overthrew them in “in His anger and in His wrath” (Deut. 29:23). Homosexuality is not the only sin there is nor is it the chief sin, but may we not be intimidated away from calling it what it is—“sin.”

“Moral Leadership?”

Neal Pollard
This is how Seth Fiegerman at Mashable summarized new Apple CEO Tim Cook’s recent moves, an array of social activist “statements” that includes an Apple gay pride parade and declaring himself homosexual, calling to attention to perceived environment and climate change, and associated causes. Fiegerman also synonymously dubbed his activism as “moral authority” and “staking out moral ground.”   The evocative title of the article is “Apple’s new moral era begins” (6/8/15). As a happy “Macster” with an iPad and iPhone, I am not a frustrated PC user looking for an opportunity to rage against the Apple machine.  It is what it is.
Whether or not you agree with Cook, he is most certainly assuming definite moral leadership.  Indeed, it is not overstating things to say he is “moralizing,” as vehemently as any preacher, professor, or reformer could.  In his powerful position at one of the most influential companies in the world, Cook is spending his leadership capital in a profound, definite, and specific way.  However, it is not as if he invented moral leadership.  Anyone with any influence in any point in history is wielding moral leadership, staking out moral ground with at least some degree of moral authority.  The defining question is, “Whose morality?”
The Bible defines morality.  As the product of a transcendent, all-powerful authority, the Bible is the only legitimate standard of morality.  It outlines a specific way of living, using words like godliness (see especially 1 Tim. and 2 Pet.), moral excellence (2 Pet. 1:5), detailing a moral lifestyle (cf. Gal. 5:22-23), and the like. It also forbids a specific way of living, using terminology like immoral and immorality.  Its standard is specific.  Consider a few examples:
  • If a man marries a woman and her mother, it is immorality (Lev. 20:14).
  • Divorcing your wife and marrying another woman is adultery, unless your wife is guilty of sexual immorality (Mat. 19:9).
  • A man who had his father’s wife was guilty of immorality (1 Cor. 5:1).
  • Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty of gross immorality and going after strange flesh (Jude 7).
  • Along with a covetous, idolatrous, drunk, or swindling person, God says to avoid the immoral (1 Cor. 5:11).
  • Immoral men are placed alongside homosexuals, kidnappers, liars and perjurers as contrary to sound teaching (1 Tim. 1:10).
  • Esau selling his birthright is called immoral (Heb. 12:16).
There are many other examples of Scripture defining morality, often by pointing out its opposite.  People who use their influence to lead people to do the immoral are certainly exerting moral leadership, but it is leadership contrary to the heart and will of God.  There is a vital need for you and me, as those who love and trust God’s Word, to exert true, moral leadership, to exalt His morality.  A saying attributed variously to Edmund Burke, John Stuart Mill, and Charles Aked, is very familiar to most: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.”  May we step forward and exert moral leadership that honors God.

The “Moral Compass” Of The Modern Culture

Neal Pollard

If a nation or people will move back toward the Bible, it must overcome three philosophical barriers.  I mentioned these in an earlier blog (read here).  Here are the three barriers:

  • The Cultural Sickness Of Subjectivity.  Subjectivism, in its final form, makes the individual “god” and their views supreme. Thoughts and feelings trump a rational look at an individual matter, and even searching for an objective viewpoint is disdained.
  • Society’s Warped View Of Tolerance.  Rather than “hate the sin, love the sinner,” the mantra is “there is no sin and no sinner.”  Though everyone has a line in the sand somewhere, no one wants anyone putting their behaviors on the other side of the line.
  • The Average Person’s Ignorance Of The Bible.  Of course, we are getting past the point where the average person believes the Bible or has a favorable view of it.  The fruit of the seeds of biblical illiteracy is more than immorality.  It includes prejudice against the Bible and contempt for those who seek to upheld it in most any forum.

Certainly, those professing to follow the Bible and its guidelines have hurt their own cause through ungodly attitudes, hypocrisy, isolation, and prejudices of their own.  Christians must be willing to make the first (and even second and third) steps (cf. Mat. 5:41).  We must model biblical teaching with righteous lives (Mat. 5:14-16; 1 Pet. 2:9).  We cannot expect the world to act Christlike, but we must expect that Christians will not be worldly.  We can effect the change we want to see, and, in time, align the culture’s moral compass with the Creator’s.