The Extremes of Antinomianism vs. Legalism

 Another great sermon by Dr. R.C. Sproul, again very nearly word-for-word.  On “doubtful things.”  Enjoy.

 The next step of our Christian life following our justification is sanctification, by which we are called to grow to maturity and into conformity to the image of Christ.   In defense of the gospel of justification by faith alone, Martin Luther said, “Justification is by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone.  A true faith that is saving faith will immediately, necessarily, and inevitably begin to show forth the fruit of that faith in the progress of sanctification.”  Also remember the apostle who told us to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling. For God is at work within us both to will and to do His good purpose.” (Philippians 2:12-13).  This means that we are not to be at ease once saved.  (Ed. Note:  I looked at the major translations of 2:12; they all ended with "fear and trembling."  I realize that people will use those words to avoid God, but the closer we get to Jesus, the better we can understand those words.)

 There are various pitfalls that undermine that progress along the way.  And perhaps the two most dangerous pitfalls are the distortions that we call antinomianism and legalism.  Antinomianism means “anti-law-ism.”  It asserts that once I am saved by grace, I no longer have to be concerned about living a life of obedience, or give any particular significance, to the Law of God.  One of the critical concerns of 16^th century Romanism, with the advent of the Reformation, was a belief that this doctrine of “faith alone” would lead to a spirit of antinomianism, because once the Law had fulfilled its purpose of driving us to Christ and the Gospel, it would have no more impact among us.  And there were those who literally moved in that direction. But we believe that though the ceremonial laws have been fulfilled in Christ and therefore abrogated, nevertheless the laws that are rooted in the very character of God, and are revealed in His moral law, still have relevance to the Christian.  Not as a means by which we achieve salvation, but rather as a means by which we proceed in sanctification—to do that which is pleasing to God.

 But we live in a time, within the evangelical church, where antinomianism is epidemic.  One denomination, in their doctrine, says the Old Testament Law has no further import to the life of the Christian.  And in that antinomian spirit, we have seen, I think, one of the most destructive doctrines that has been embraced widely in the evangelical community—namely the concept of the “carnal Christian.”  It is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms.  True, we have a fleshly spirit that is not completely eradicated until we enter Glory, but that’s not the problem when we encounter the doctrine of the “carnal Christian.”  Their idea is that a person can be truly saved, and receive Christ as Savior—but NOT as Lord.  And they may never produce any fruit of a sanctified life; but may remain carnal (fleshly) until death.  Christ is supposedly in this person’s life, but not reigning on the throne of their life.  “Self” remains established in the governing center and the core of the person.

 But on the other extreme of the continuum is the threat that’s always there of legalism.  What is legalism?  There is not one single monolithic form of legalism.  There are varieties, different types of meaning.  The worst meaning has reference to the idea that by your works, you can satisfy the demands of God’s Law, and can gain salvation through your own works.  That is the view that is so widely held by people who have never heard the Bible say that “by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified” (Romans 3:20).  In fact, the vast majority of people out there really believe in a works-salvation, a legalistic manner and means of being redeemed.  Which is false not only with respect to the way of salvation set forth in Scripture; but it is a way of salvation that if it were indeed the Biblical way of salvation, would cause these people who believe it nothing but everlasting Doom.  Because none of us do the works of the Law that are required to satisfy the legal demands of God.

 Other forms of legalism were those perfected by the Pharisees, which drew the rebuke, and at times, the wrath, of our Lord Himself. The Pharisees were fond of majoring in minors.  That’s a form of legalism where you give great zeal and great attention to minor matters of the Law, but ignore the weightier matters of the Law.  They paid attention to the tithe, but ignored justice and mercy.  You know people like that; they’re scrupulous in their church attendance, they wouldn’t think of shorting God in the collection plate--but as far as the rest of the fruit of the spirit is concerned, they could care less!  They have majored in minors.

 The other thing the Pharisees were experts at was a kind of “ethical loop-holism.”  If they could obey the letter of the Law, never mind the spirit of the Law, they spent time looking for a way around it to suit their needs.  If they wanted to go on a trip that was more than a Sabbath day’s journey, they would simply, during the week, have a courier leave a toothbrush under a rock at various intervals, because, legally, the presence of one’s toothbrush established temporary legal residence.  And so even though they made a trip of 15 miles in one day (thus breaking their law of travel on the Sabbath), they only went the distance passing these rocks containing their toothbrushes—so thus they legally never went more than a “Sabbath day’s journey.”  (These were Philadelphia lawyers before there was a Philadelphia.)

 But one of the most destructive forms of legalism then and now, the one that was most seriously practiced by the Pharisees, was to add to the Law of God. To bind men’s consciences where God had left them free.  Substituting the human tradition for the Law of God.  We wag our fingers at the Pharisees for doing that, but that problem has plagued the church in every generation.

The problem that we have between antinomianism on the one hand, and legalism on the other, depends on what kind of an atmosphere you have at your church.  To these poles of legalism and antinomianism are the questions of “indifferent matters” and Christian liberty.  Matters that are indifferent refers to those areas where God has not commanded to do or to abstain from.  We have Christian liberty in that zone.  Remember, though, Christian liberty never gives anybody the liberty to disobey God.  That’s another form of antinomianism, where Christian liberty becomes the disguise, or the license, for licentiousness, where people are saying, “I’m free, I’m liberated, by the Spirit (and so I can disobey God).”

 So the big issue is:  How we as Christians can co-exist, when we don’t always have the same understanding of what it is that fits into the category of God’s “indifference” and where our Christian liberty begins, and where it ends.  That was a problem in the Corinthian church, it was a problem in the Roman church, and it has been a problem ever since. Let’s look at Romans 14:1-2:

 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. ² For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables.  Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 

 Paul is saying, in the body of Christ you have weaker brothers who have this particular scruple about that which God has not legislated.  How are you to respond to the weaker brother?  We might insist on educating him on the spot, that our way is “correct.”  No; we both belong to Christ; how dare we judge one who is Christ’s servant?  If we are to judge, we are to judge according to the explicit standards set forth in sacred Scripture, not by dithering about on uncertain scruples.  I don’t think this situation is as bad today as it was 50 years ago.  Then, evangelicanism was plagued by a kind of spirit of legalism that said that if you’re a Christian, you don’t drink, you don’t smoke, you don’t dance, you don’t play cards, and you don’t go to movies. Now, those virtues still prevail in certain places; but this became such a matter that one’s entire spirituality, and even Christian profession, was to be judged by conformity to these specific taboos within the Christian community.  And you go through your Bible, and you can’t find anything explicit about them in Scripture.  So how can you judge?  But these became so important that they became the tests of one’s Christianity.  A lady who tells the waitress at a restaurant, “Oh, no, we don’t drink, we’re Christians,” leaves the waitress with the impression that that’s what Christianity is all about.  But is that what the Gospel is?  That’s not what the apostle Paul is saying here in this Romans text.  But many people have been taught that it is a sin to do things that God does not declare to be sinful.

 So, if I believe it is a sin to do these taboos, if I do it, is it a sin?  Yes!  Not because the thing itself is sinful; but what is sinful is doing something you believe to be sinful—that’s sin to do it.  That’s why we all have to be exceedingly sensitive and careful what we do around these folk.  Go back to the Corinthian problem (I Corinthians 8ff).  Meat was offered to idols in a pagan worship service, and then was sold in the marketplace—as meat.  Some Christians, not wanting a hint of scandal, or association with paganism, said, “I’m not going to buy that stuff.  It’s been tainted.”  What’s Paul’s view?  Hey, it’s meat.  It’s the difference of what we call primary and secondary separation.  Primary separation is where you separate yourself from offering meat to idols, which itself is a sin.  But if I decide I have to separate myself from anybody else who has ever offered meat to idols, or from the meat itself, that’s what we call “secondary separation.”  Actually, to be consistent in the application of secondary separation, you’re going to have to leave the planet!—because no matter where you are, or what you do, or from whom you buy, you’re going to be dealing, at some level, with people who are in sin.

 So how does the stronger brother deal with a brother who has this scruple? You can make fun of him, badger him with criticisms—or you can respect his conscience.  You should say, “I know you have this scruple, and I don’t want to make you stumble by trying to entice you to indulge in something that you are convinced is a violation of the Law of God.”  Paul says, and I don’t think he is just using hyperbole, “I will give up meat altogether for the sake of my weaker brother.”  That is his attitude.  If a person has a scruple that I don’t share, and that’s unto the Lord, and because their conscience is held captive by their understanding of the things of God, I am to bend over backwards to be caring, loving, sensitive to that person.  And not flaunt my liberty in their face.  You might do it in private so as not to scandalize the weaker brother. Thus, our liberty is not an autonomy whereby we’re allowed to do anything we feel like doing.  But it is a freedom that must always be accompanied by a charitable sensitivity to those who have scruples that are different from ours.

 But now here’s where it gets complicated.  What happens when the weaker brother wants to elevate the scruple he or she has to the level of a moral standard for Christianity, or a standard that must be obeyed to be a member in good standing; or a standard that it becomes necessary to be obeyed in order to be an officer in the church?  Now, the weaker brother becomes the legislating brother; and now he begins to take the scruple he has and uses it to bind the consciences of the people, and destroy Christian liberty—what do you do now?

 That’s one question.  Another question that is close on its heels is the question, “who really is the weaker brother?”   How do you discern it?  You can try to extend God’s morality, but extend it too far.  We have to be very sure that the standards we impose upon people in the church are Biblical standards, and not our own traditional scruples.  I’ve known ministers who have required of their elders that they must sign a pledge not to have any alcoholic beverage including wine—ever—in order to be qualified to be an officer in the church.  Thus they make a standard in the church that would preclude the membership of the apostle Paul, and, yes, of Jesus Himself!  That same pastor will tell you that the wine used in the Bible was not fermented.  Well, it’s not so clear.  Jesus was not called a wine-bibber because He drank Welch’s grape juice.  Nobody worried about exploding old wineskins by putting grape juice in them.  It’s not grape juice that “maketh the heart glad,” and it’s not grape juice that you take for your stomach’s sake.  The attempts to take a cultural thing in America and force it upon the Mideast cannot be done.  You go to Palestine and say that the vineyards were used to make raisins and grape juice; they will laugh you to scorn. No doubt a strong, vehement prohibition against drunkenness is needed, but we find it too easy to add to the standards of God.

 So here’s my problem.  When the pastor imposes that standard that I’ve just used as an example, or any other such extra-Biblical standard on the elders, will that minister admit to being a weaker brother?  Unlikely.  Ministers should not be weaker brothers; they should be able to handle Scripture in a way as to not be caught up in issues of whether to eat meat or vegetables—they should know better than that.  For the solution of this conundrum, let’s look at Galatians 2:11:

 Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face…  

 Why? The next words: …because he was to be blamed.   Here we have a controversy between two titans of the apostolic community, Peter and Paul; and it’s not sensitively done in private, but to his face; and, under the impetus of the Holy Spirit, Paul incorporates it in sacred Scripture.

 Why are we breaking the rules about sensitivity, which will include not embarrassing him, and what about not reprimanding, that we outlined above?

Peter, from his Cornelius event, knew it was right to eat with the Gentiles when the Christians gathered.  But when the Judaizers came, Peter avoided the Gentiles. Paul felt that Peter was caving in (as Scripture puts it, “played the hypocrite with them”) to the heretical doctrine of the Judaizers—who preached that Christians must also obey Jewish law when saved.  They had an army of scruples on matters where God had no doctrine to avoid or affirm.  Salvation did not include the old law and its man-made burdens.  We are to live by love, and by the Holy Spirit.

 Now, this is no longer the simple matter of eating vegetables or eating meat.  This had escalated into the Judaizer heresy, where they had reinstituted the requirements of the dietary and ceremonial laws upon Christian believers.  This was serious, and the Judaizers were the weaker brothers.  These people couldn’t live with the liberty that Christ had given them from these Old Testament practices.  Jesus gave that liberty, not simply out of kindness, but there were profound theological concerns there.  Paul said, if you enforce circumcision again, since the significance of circumcision has been fulfilled once and for all in the death of Jesus Christ—who was circumcised, or cursed by God—then you are now placing yourselves, symbolically, again, under all of the terms of the Old Covenant , that have already been fulfilled by Jesus—and you’re crucifying Christ afresh.  So it’s not just a matter of scruples; it’s the matter of the Gospel.  As Galatians 5:11-14 says:

 And I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why do I still suffer persecution? Then the offense of the cross has ceased. ¹² I could wish that those who trouble you would even cut themselves off!  For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. ¹⁴ For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

 Note that Paul really wishes people with serious heresy would be cut off from the church—and, as it really says, cut off from God! Paul insists that liberty is there, but warns against carrying that to the extreme of antinomianism. On the other side of the coin, God instructs sensitivity to those with scruples.  But the Judaizers were insisting that he circumcise Titus, to use another example.  And what did Paul do about that?  As soon as the weaker brother tried to enforce his weakness to become the law of the church, the real Gospel was threatened; and Paul fought tooth and nail against the tyranny of the weaker brother.  Anyone that tries to make it a rule of the church, they must be resisted. They must not be allowed to establish laws where God has left us free.  Applying these principles takes the wisdom of Solomon.  We apply the Word of God and the love of Christ that is shed abroad in our hearts.  We cannot simply tenaciously hold on to our own liberty, but to protect the Gospel while being patient with those who are young in the faith—but try not to allow people to tell waitresses—and promote distortions about what being Christian is.

The Holy Spirit will help us in these decisions.  It is made easier by the overriding principle of love.

The Other Side of God

 I would like to give you, pretty much word for word, a great sermon by Dr. R.C. Sproul, preached just before he entered the hospital for respiratory treatment that eventually killed him.

We live in a culture, and, sadly, in modern-day churches, that, if they believe in the existence of God, do not consider what's involved for us in God's holiness.  But if, peradventure, some may think about His holiness, they don’t consider God's divine Justice as well.  And if, with the lamp of Diogenes, we are able to find a handful of people who meditate on God's holiness and justice, it is next to impossible to find someone who will add to these elements the idea that God is a God of wrath.  Because the assumption in the world and the church today is that the love of God, the mercy of God, and the grace of God either swallows up the justice and wrath of God, or certainly trumps it. Even on national occasions, where noted people are buried out of the National Cathedral in Washington, it is commonplace to hear choirs sing or bagpipers play “Amazing Grace”--but nobody believes that His grace is amazing.  Because again the assumption is, God is love, and grace; and since that doesn't mix with He is also holy, just, and a God of wrath--we need to "resolve the contradiction" by ignoring His wrath and justice.

Let's hear from God on some Scripture regarding this.  Reading I Chronicles 13:1-6, David called all spiritual leaders in the land to form a grand procession and celebration to bring the ark of the covenant from storage back to his capital city.  Let’s pick it up from verse 7:

So they carried the ark of God on a new cart from the house of Abinadab, and Uzza and Ahio drove the cart. ⁸ Then David and all Israel played music before God with all their might, with singing, on harps, on stringed instruments, on tambourines, on cymbals, and with trumpets. ⁹ And when they came to Chidon’s threshing floor, Uzza put out his hand to hold the ark, for the oxen stumbled. ¹⁰ Then the anger of the Lord was aroused against Uzza, and He struck him because he put his hand to the ark; and he died there before God. ¹¹ And David became angry because of the Lord’s outbreak against Uzza…

David was afraid of God that day.  When I (Dr. Sproul) was in seminary, I was taught that the Biblical passages that refer to the sudden explosion and paroxysm of rage that God manifested in the Old Testament, showed that the Old Testament is not the inspired Word of God, but is simply an example of a popular religion of a tribal deity from a semi-nomadic group of people who were pre-scientific and unsophisticated.  And they would say that these episodes recorded in the Old Testament were totally incompatible with the New Testament portrait of the love of God revealed in Jesus.  So what I experienced in seminary was a revival of the Marcionite heresy (Ed. Note:  popular around 144 A.D.); they believed in an attempt to expurgate from the Bible all references to this Old Testament angry deity.  But I thought that this episode, and others like it, since they were recorded in the pages of sacred Scriptures, would at least deserve the philosophy of a second glance.  So, David is going to bring the most sacred vessel of their religion to the holy place; he is going to restore the Glory to Israel to a brand new place.  So he has a new cart made; and in the middle of a jubilant procession, the ox stumbles, and tilts the cart, and the sacred ark is in immediate danger of falling into the dirt, or mud, where it would be surely desecrated.  Instinctively, out of a sense of respect for this sacred object, lest it become marred in the dirt, Uzzah stretches forth his hand.  As soon as he did, the heavens opened, and a deep voice shouted to him from heaven, “Thank you, Uzzah!”  Well…not how it happened.  As soon as he touched the ark, instantly, he was stricken.  God executed him.

Oh! The gymnastics my Old Testament professors went through in seminary, saying, “Well, that’s the way it seemed to these unsophisticated Hebrews who were watching this. Surely the man dropped dead of a heart attack, generated by his terror that he would venture to touch that sacred object.”  Or they would say, “This is evidence of whatever portrayal we have of the wrath of God in the Old Testament; it portrays God’s as being arbitrary, whimsical, capricious…” One professor even called this “the dark side of Yahweh…the demonic element within the nature of God Himself.”

Evidently these professors never read Numbers 4.  That’s when God gave the responsibility of the priesthood and the teaching to the tribe of Levi. The sole responsibility of the clan of the Kohathites was to look after the sacred vessels for the tabernacle.  But the ark was designed by God Himself to have rings on the sides; then they used long poles, or staves, inserted them through the rings, and carried the ark, on foot, balancing the staves on their shoulders on either side of the ark. The idea was that they, as human beings, would never come in contact with the throne of God. Keep in mind that the ark was designed for the purpose of manifesting God’s holiness. Numbers 4:15 explicitly says:

…the sons of Kohath shall come to carry them; but they shall not touch any holy thing, lest they die.

Jonathan Edwards has a sermon about this; he says “the sin of Uzzah was the sin of arrogance.”  It looked to me like a heroic act of humility.  But herein was the arrogance; Uzzah assumed that contact with the mud would be a greater sacrilege than contact with the hand of a human being.  What is mud?  Earth and water.  There is nothing innately sinful about dirt. If the ark touches the ground, it’s not going to do any damage.  What desecrates the throne of God is not the touch of earth; it’s the touch of man.  There is sin in the hand of Uzzah.  So he was executed for profaning the most holy object in Israel.

Now please turn to Leviticus 10:1-2:

Then Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer and put fire in it, put incense on it, and offered profane fire before the Lord, which He had not commanded them. ² So fire went out from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the Lord.  

 Whatever made it profane, it did not please God. These young priests were simply involved in experimental worship.  Maybe to try to change the liturgy that God had ordained, in such a way that it would be more appealing to the congregation. They missed the fundamental principle of worship: worship is to be determined not by what is pleasing to us, but what is pleasing to God.  (Ed. Note:  There was applause for Dr. Sproul here; if they’re thinking like me, they’re thinking about some of the worst of contemporary religious music, always a sore spot in church lately).

God never counts noses in the Old Testament, to decide what was the “best” form of worship; convenience to the crowd is not necessary.

The most successful worship service ever recorded, which drew more people in attendance, with singing with so much gusto that when their voices were heard miles away, on a mountain, one of the men who heard the noise of this thought a war had broken out.  He thought the noise that he heard was the tumult that accompanies battle. But when they took time to investigate it, it was not a war, it was a worship service--for the golden calf!

Nothing attracts greater crowds than the practices of idolatry.

But these young fellows were just trying to improve on the worship of Israel; they offered a new way of sacrifice. And as soon as they did it, a fire came out and burned them to a crisp.

I want to ask you this question: What do you suppose Aaron’s response to this was?  I mean, he’s their father; “God, what are You doing? These are my sons.  All they did was tinker a little bit.”  And he speaks to Moses.  Moses said to him, as it were: “Do you remember what the Lord said at your consecration?” We can find it in Lev. 10:3:

By those who come near me, I must be regarded as holy, and before all the people, I must be glorified.

But instead of regarding God as holy, Nadab and Abihu came to God in profanity. Do you realize how the Lord God Omnipotent considers our profane worship?  When we dare to come into His presence without considering Him as holy?  And without seeing our primary responsibility in our celebration of worship is displaying before the whole congregation, the glory of God.

What does it say that Aaron did when Moses gave him this reminder?  In typical masterful Biblical understatement; the verse says, “So Aaron held his peace.”  There was nothing else for Aaron to do, no room for debate. “I am the Lord, there is none other; and I will be regarded as holy by anyone who comes near to Me.”    The story goes on and Moses calls others to:

…come near, carry your brethren from before the sanctuary out of the camp.

This seems that God is being gracious now, and we assume they will get a proper burial.  No, uh-uh.  Verses 5-7:

So they went near and carried them by their tunics out of the camp, as Moses had said.  ⁶ And Moses said to Aaron, and to Eleazar and Ithamar, his sons, “Do not uncover your heads nor rend your clothes, lest you die, and wrath come upon all the people. But let your brethren, the whole house of Israel, bewail the burning which the Lord has kindled. ⁷ You shall not go out from the door of the tabernacle of meeting, lest you die, for the anointing oil of the Lord is upon you.” And they did according to the word of Moses.

You see what He is saying through Moses?  “I don’t even want their bodies in the camp.  And I don’t want anybody rending their garments and lamenting in dust and ashes.  I don’t want a wake for these guys. They’re polluting My sanctuary. I want their bodies, and anything associated with them, carried outside the camp—because they have profaned Me with their false worship.”

You know, the most famous sermon ever preached in America, was preached in the 18^th century in Connecticut by Jonathan Edwards.  You all know the name of that sermon:  Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.  I had to read that for the first time in college, where it was required reading as an example of “sadistic preaching.”  And I thought, even then, if Jonathan Edwards were sadistic, which he wasn’t, and if he believed in hell, which he did, a sadistic preacher would do everything in his power, gleefully, to tell his congregation that there was no such place as hell.  And, if I were sadistic, I would secretly enjoy the inevitability of their being plunged into it.  Edwards was no sadist; he loved God, and he loved His people—and he cared about their ultimate destination. Almost everybody in America has heard the title of the sermon; almost no one is aware of the text for that sermon—from Deuteronomy 32:35:

….their foot shall slip in due time

Edwards’ sermon has also been used in classrooms because of its graphic imagery of the wrath of God.  God is poised as a dam building up water until it is ready to break, to pour forth upon mankind; as a man with a bow drawn, aimed and ready to let go and pierce the heart of a sinner, all visualized in discomforting detail.  But the only thing that keeps you from falling into hell is the hand of God.  So the sermon is on the wrath of God, but also on His grace of His stayed hand.

That sermon wouldn’t scare anybody in our culture or in our churches, because nobody, really, believes in hell anymore.  Hell, if it exists, is a place for maybe six guys--the worst of humanity.  And the greatest lie, the most monstrous lie, the most brazen lie of all, is the lie that people tell themselves, “I have nothing to worry about from the wrath of God.  My god is a god of love.”  Well, your god is an idol—and no God at all.

Edwards challenged his congregation, and said, “Can you give me any reason, since you got out bed this morning, why you haven’t fallen into hell?”  Apart from the Gospel, dear friends, I couldn’t answer that question.  I couldn’t give any reason why I’m alive this afternoon, and not in hell—apart from Christ.

My favorite illustration of how calloused we typically become, goes back to the second year of my teaching career, when I was given the assignment of teaching 250 college freshmen a course in the introduction to the Old Testament.  They were given three short term papers, due September 30, October 30, and November 30.  On September 30, 25 of them fearfully admitted to not having their paper.  They timidly added their excuse.  I graciously gave them 3 extra days, and they were most appreciative. They took Adderall, and most completed it in the three days. On October 30, 50 of them did not have their papers.  They explained calmly that it was mid-term, homecoming games, etc.  I graciously again gave them 3 extra days.  They started to sing, spontaneously, 250 voices, “We love you Prof Sproul, oh yes we do…” And I was the most popular professor on that campus—until November 30. This time, 150 students came in without their papers. I watched them walk in as cool and as casual as they could be, and I saw one of them, a Marine veteran, and I said, “Johnson—where’s your paper?”  He said, “Hey, HEY.” (Happy Days TV.) “Don’t worry about it, prof, I’ll have it for you in a couple days.”  I picked up the most dreadful object in a freshman’s memory, a little black book, opened it up, and said, “Johnson, you don’t have your term paper?”  He said, “No.”  I said “F.” “Nicholson, where’s your term paper?”  “Don’t have it.”  “F.”  And then, out of the midst of this crowd, somebody shouted what you know they would shout, “THAT’S NOT FAIR.”  I turned around, “Fitzgerald, was that you who said that?”  He said, “Yeah. Not fair.  Right.”  “Weren’t you late last month with your paper?”  He said “yeah.”  I said “Fitzgerald, I’ll tell you what I’m going to do. If it’s justice you want, it’s justice you will get.”  And I went back, and changed his grade from October to an F. There was this gasp in the room.  And I said, “Who else wants justice?” I didn’t get any takers. It reminded me of a song similar to My Fair Lady: “I’ve grown accustomed to his grace.” What had happened was, the first time they were late, they were amazed by grace.  The second time, they were no longer surprised, they assumed it.  By the third time, they Demanded it.  I developed a lax hand, in my desire to be liked.  They believed grace was an inalienable right, an entitlement to which they all deserved.

I took that occasion to explain to my class, “You know what you have done when you said “that’s not fair?”  You have confused justice and grace. The minute you think that anybody owes you grace, a bell should go off in your head to remind you that you’re no longer thinking about grace—because grace, by definition, is something you don’t deserve, it’s something you can’t possibly deserve.

You, my friends, have no merit before God—except demerit. And if God should ever, ever, treat you justly, outside of Christ, you will perish. And your foot will slip in due time.

Any time there is a group this large, assembled, I don’t care for what reason, even a church service, I know that there are people in this room, right now, who are that far from hell (holding his fingers close together). And they’re assuming they’re not going to go there. But if there is a God, and there is, and if He is holy, and He is, and if He is just, and He is, He could not possibly be without wrath. And if you have not been reconciled through the blood of His Son, the only thing you have to look forward to—is His wrath.  Which is a divine wrath. Which is a furious wrath. And it is an eternal wrath. Because God must be regarded as holy by anyone who comes near Him.

So, my beloved, if you would come into the presence of God, consider the nature of the God you are approaching—that you may come covered by the righteousness of Christ.

Satan's Attempts to Destroy Christ's Lineage, and then Christ Himself

 What say we look at certain world events from another dimension, namely a spiritual dimension?  I’m not Frank Peretti, but I guarantee, it will add meaning to what’s happening in the world, and will go far to explaining what we’re on earth for.  So here we go:  In Genesis 3:15, God, in effect, threw down the gauntlet at Satan when He said to him:

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed;  He shall bruise your head,     And you shall bruise His heel.”

To explain, Satan and Eve’s descendants would be enemies,   God did not desire to make enemies, but Satan had already declared such in his desire to be equal with God (Isaiah 14:12-17). Further, “your (Satan’s) seed” refers to those who refuse to obey God and refuse to believe in His Son, Jesus the Christ.  In “her Seed,” the capital letter means Jesus, a descendant of Eve.  And, I might add, you could include all those who are followers of Jesus and have made Him Lord of their lives.  So, in short, Satan is the enemy of the Jews, who carried the Messianic lineage (as you will see below) and the enemy of true Christians, and he wants nothing more than to destroy us, our lives and reputation, and everything spiritual in us.

God tells Satan that His Son will “bruise (Satan’s) head,” a mortal wound.  Satan will only “bruise (Jesus’) heel, a non-mortal wound (but only because He was resurrected).

So God has thrown down the gauntlet.  Who will win, God or Satan? Satan, before killing Christ by the hand of his own followers (who were, by the way, both Jew and Gentile), tried numerous times in history to destroy His ascendants. If he could do that, Christ would never have been born.  That seems “smart.”  So let’s tell the story about his various efforts to kill.

Attempt #1:  Eve hoped that her first child would be God’s Seed and the Deliverer from her sin in the garden of Eden.  That child was Cain.  But Cain ignored God’s instructions on how to do the atonement offering, and became a murderer of Abel, Eve’s second son.  Now she hoped her third child would accomplish her desire for a Deliverer—Seth.  Well, Seth stayed righteous and Christ was indeed descended from him. So Satan failed on Attempt #1, since the lineage continued despite the small family that he brought evil into.

Attempt #2:  Many of Satan’s followers, also known as fallen angels, came to earth and married earth women, bearing babies that grew up to be “mighty men” and “men of renown.”  (I have a couple blogs on this wild idea--which was believed by church fathers; refer to those blogs with DNA in the title).Grown up, they were called Nephilim (Gen.6:1-4, NIV).  They were also wicked; and from other appearances in Scripture, they were super-tall and, obviously, very strong.  Why not?  They were half mortal, and half immortal (fallen angels, their fathers, retained their immortality).   The Nephilim dominated, and completely corrupted the people of Noah’s day, both morally and physically (by deviant DNA mixing).  Anyway, Satan figured, if he could corrupt the earth like this, then no one would be righteous or physically pure to bear a pure Seed.

But he was defeated because Noah and his immediate family kept clean, and he made an ark as God had directed, and everyone else was destroyed, leaving Noah, his wife, and immediate family to start all over.  Satan failed on Attempt #2.

Attempt #3:  God picked the Hebrew people to be His people, beginning with Abraham.  Their job was to carry His Scripture, and to worship Him as the only God---in the midst of a totally corrupt world that didn’t know Him.  (The Jews didn’t do a bang-up job on God’s instructions, in the long run).  To avert death by a record 7-year famine, the Hebrews moved to Egypt to farm the best land there.  They were allowed to do this because Abraham’s great-grandson Joseph was in good with the Pharaoh (by revealing to him a vision about the upcoming famine so he could prepare for it).  So God made sure that His Jewish family was accepted in Egypt, which had saved grain, so they didn’t starve in the great famine.  So Satan’s attempt at starving them out failed in Attempt #3.

Attempt #4: Later Pharaohs made the Jews slaves for 400 years.  One evil Pharaoh got up one morning and thought, “These Jewish slaves are becoming more populous than we Egyptians, and that’s a danger; let’s kill every baby boy at birth and stop their population growth.”  He gave the order—unfortunately, he stupidly did it to the midwives--which were mostly Hebrews!  (I presume he assumed that their fear of him would even make them commit infanticide).  However, even at risk of their own lives, they refused to kill the newborn Hebrew boys.  That not only saved the Hebrew population, but it saved little Moses, who later became a great deliverer himself.  Attempt #4 failed.  You would think that Satan would have gotten the message by now.  When God decides to do something, it gets done—even through sinful men.  You gotta give credit to the Hebrew midwives.  We need some of them today, in our abortion clinics.

Attempt #5: Moses, through God, performed miracles of destruction on the country of Egypt.  But Pharaoh was so stubborn that he held on through each disaster; it finally took the death of his firstborn to release the Jews.  Early in their exodus, the Pharaoh and his army went after them again, only to be wiped out by the closing Red Sea—another miracle by God.  So the Jews were not only saved from destruction by Pharaoh’s army, but they were Free.  Attempt #5 failed.

Attempt #6: Let’s back up in time a bit. Please note two verses God had told Abraham. First, Genesis 12:1-3:

Now the Lord had said to Abram: “Get out of your country, from your family and from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you. ² I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing. ³ I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.

Secondly, God told Abraham, in Genesis 15:13-14:

Then He said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. ¹⁴ And also the nation whom they serve I will judge; afterward they shall come out with great possessions. 

 Satan, we can assume, listened in to these conversations—and thus knew, upon watching Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob’s travels, that God had chosen the land of Canaan as His land for His people.  (Important side note:  Satan does not have God’s powers.  He can only be in one place at a time, and cannot read minds.  But he has lots of demon-followers in lots of places who help him that way, and he can guess thoughts by our facial emotions, and what we say.  And, I would imagine, he has various ways of putting sinful thoughts in our head—like he did with Pharaoh on infanticide).  Putting these two verses together, Satan figured that the Hebrews won’t be in Canaan, God’s choice for their living space, for at least 400 years; they would be elsewhere (in Egypt) instead.  He also hoped that Israel (since they were a nation now) would have to conquer the various tribes of Canaan to secure the land.  Thus, Satan comes up with Attempt #6:  stop the Israelis from entering God’s chosen land, Canaan.  If he could do that, they would have to wander to different places and their nation would be assimilated and fizzle out.  So he concocted up another sexual use for his fallen angels.  You, the reader, may roll your eyes and say, “come on, how do I keep coming up with these wild stories?”  Well, again, read my blogs.  And, again, I have Biblical proof. Let’s read Genesis 6:4, this time in the NIV version:

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

As we saw before, the Nephilim were the deviant DNA children of the fallen angel fathers, who were immortal, and the mortal earth mothers during Noah's time.  But note the underlined phrase “and also afterward.”  Every phrase in Scripture has a reason to exist in God’s Word, and this one says that we would get more Nephilim even after they were drowned in the Flood in Noah’s day.  In other words, the fallen angels came down again, proved sexually attractive to the females again, and we got more Nephilim.  But this time, men did not live 800 or 900 years like in Noah’s day.  Their lives were short, like ours. So the deviant DNA can’t be spread as fast.  So Satan concentrated his efforts on spawning to a limited area—namely, of course, Canaan. These giants hopefully would scare the Israelis away, and they couldn’t stay in “God’s chosen land.” So he picked several tribes in Canaan, sent his fallen angels there, and they became populated by the evil Nephilim.  Scripture backs this idea up; it indicates giants existed in:  the Philistines, the Anakim, the  Rephaim, the Zamzumim, the Emim, and the Amorites. All in Canaan, of course.  (Check them out in Numbers 13:32; Deut 2:10,11,20,21; Deut 3:11,13).  Deuteronomy provides more detail on Og, king of Bashon, whose bed was 15 feet long and 6-1/2 feet wide.   And of course we have Goliath, killed by David, several hundred years later, who probably was at least 9 feet tall.

Satan almost got what he wanted; the nation of Israel, freed from Pharaoh after 400 years, went north, and approached the land of Canaan.  Moses sent out spies to see the lay of the land.  They brought back wonderful food, but their knees were shaking.  As they reported in Numbers 13:32-33:

The land through which we have gone, in spying it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants; and all the people whom we saw in it are men of great size. There also we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak are part of the Nephilim); and we became like grasshoppers in our own sight, and so we were in their sight.

 A bit of hyperbole, there, about the size comparison—but you get the picture; these were giants—again. So the Israelis voted to NOT go in.  God was so disappointed in how they wouldn’t depend on Him for deliverance that He made them wander through the desert area for another 38 years, until everyone who voted dropped dead.  Now all that were left were the kids in the earlier days, now grown up.  But these “kids” were not dummies; they realized  that they had miracles (their shoes never wore out, they always found water, they had free food dropped on them 6 days a week), and they realized that their non-believing parents paid the ultimate price for disobedience; and finally, walking the desert every day made them hardened, so they could be soldiers with endurance. Plus, I would imagine, they would do anything to stop wandering drudgedly through the desert.  So, with Joshua in command (Moses died), this time they voted to go in and fight.  A brave decision.  God built up Joshua’s courage by appearing to him as well.  This time they cleared out most of these corrupt and sometimes giant people (details on the Canaanite idolatries are too disgusting to explain here).  The key is the phrase “most of.”  Goliath is an example of how there were some still around years later that Joshua couldn’t get to.  In any event, Satan’s effort to stop Israel from moving to the land of God’s calling failed.  Attempt #6:  FAIL. Satan is now 0-6.

Attempt #7:  This attempt was Satan’s efforts to kill David and his descendants.  This was because Satan figured out that the Messiah would be in David’s line.  How did he deduce that?  First, he narrowed his search to the tribe of Judah, based on Genesis 49:10:

The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor a lawgiver from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes;

Satan also saw how King Saul disappointed God by not following His instructions.  And then, there was the bravery of David, from the tribe of Judah, and how he boasted about God’s power when he defeated Goliath.  So Satan figured that David was next on the throne, and thus he wanted to kill David. Then Samuel anointed David as future king.  So Satan fills Saul’s mind with envy and hatred of David to an obsessive decree.  Saul personally went hunting to kill David day and night.  And there are many verses that proves that Saul was moved by demonic forces.  Earlier, while David tried to play music to soothe Saul’s violent temper tantrums, Saul with no reason threw a spear at David.  Twice.  Another example of demonic oppression was, Saul sought out a medium, expressly forbidden by God.

But David continued to prove his faith in God.  He was egged on by his military to kill Saul when he had many lucky opportunities, but he remained righteous.  If he had murdered Saul, he would have possibly been an unfit candidate for the Messiah’s line, which would have served Satan well.  (Of course, after he became king, he was a conspirator to murder, but sincerely repented—which is tenderly recorded in Psalm 51. God’s wonderful grace then forgave him.)

When David died, Satan also did everything he could to tempt David’s descendants into evil, hoping to break the lineage to the Messiah that way.  Solomon was David’s son.  Solomon’s many wives seduced him into idolatry.  Solomon spent government money lavishly to build palaces and a glorious temple, burnished with alarming amounts of gold and precious stones.  Thus he taxed his people heavily.  When Solomon died, his own son was callous about the request of the common people to reduce the tax, and the kingdom was split! There was the north, still called Israel, and south, called Judah. This was a real threat to their continued existence, since a divided nation is weaker and will be attacked by enemies. The following generations proved to be a continuing downdraft of morals and corruptions, of idolatry and religious sexual fornication.  They abandoned God and followed the pagan religions around them.

Attempt #8.  Ahaziah.  His events happened around 885 BC.  They are well after Solomon’s sons had a rift and split the nation into two parts.  We keep our focus on kings of Judah, not the 10 tribes of Israel in the north, because of Hebrews 7:14 and Revelation 5:5.  But it’s best described in Genesis 49:10, as above.

Despite the same-name confusion from II Kings and II Chronicles, Ahaziah’s story begins in II Chronicles 22:1:

Then the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah his youngest son king in his place, for the raiders who came with the Arabians into the camp had killed all the older sons. So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram, king of Judah, reigned.

See also II Kings 8:25. As the above verses say, due to war, his brothers all died. He was alone among heirs.  God's lineage plan was hanging by a single thread.  Not a problem for Him.  So He kept Ahaziah from being killed, and he began reigning when he was 22, or, ah, 42. II Kings 8:26 says 22, but II Chronicles 22:2 says 42.  A copyist's error.  Remember, Holy Scripture is perfect in the original.  But an error like this doesn't mean we throw away inspiration.  More than likely, he was 22.

Attempt #9.  Joash.  Not long after the last one, we had another one-man crisis.  Seems that Jehu was ordained by a prophet to kingship over Israel (I Kings 19:16).  So he did a coup d’etat, and killed the king of Israel, Joram. And, for good measure, ordered the assassination of Ahaziah, king of Judah (II Kings 9:27).  Then he finished the job in Israel, killing Jezebel and all 70 of Ahab’s sons.  (II Kings 9:33 and 10:7).  Then he took the kingship in Israel.  When Ahaziah’s mother, Athaliah, heard of her son’s death, she took immediate advantage:  she killed all Ahaziah’s sons, intending to reign herself (II Kings 11:1-3).  God's lineage was under threat.  But as II Kings 11:2 records, God saw that she missed one:

But Jehosheba (or Jehoshabeath)….sister of Ahaziah, took Joash the son of Ahaziah, and stole him away from among the king’s sons who were being murdered; and they hid him and his nurse in the bedroom, from Athaliah, so that he was not killed.

So the lineage of Christ was again preserved; one man survived.

The story of Joash (also called Jehoash has a semi-happy ending, as you read II Kings 11:21-12:1:

In the seventh year of Jehu, Jehoash became king, and he reigned forty years in Jerusalem. 

The reason I call it “semi” happy is because while he was a good king, and reigned for a long time, II Kings 12:3 says he didn’t take the “high places” away. These were places for worship of a false god.

Attempt #10 Perhaps the most entertaining event in the Bible is the book of Esther.  It is short, and it is wonderful reading. It’s around 500 BC.  Romance (well, as far as they knew, romance) wins, pride loses.  I only have enough space to give you an incomplete Cliff notes.  After Persia defeated Babylonia, King Ahasuerus had a beauty contest and picked a new wife, Esther.  Unbeknownst to him, she was Jewish.  But one of the king’s servants, Haman, hated her cousin Mordecai because Mordecai refused to bow to acknowledge his greatness in possessing his high office.  Haman was infuriated at this slight; he resolved to not only kill Mordecai, but all Jews in Persia, which was most of the known world at the time. This would again be another attempt to snuff out the Messianic lineage.  Satan may have given him the idea that it wasn’t enough just to kill Mordecai, but all Jews. (It would not be unusual, since he was from the Amalekite race, enemies of Jews). Through false witness to his king, he got the king’s signet ring to carry out his genocide.  He picked a day—soon.  He was willing to pay a lot of money to those who would do the killing—of every Jewish man, woman, and every child.  A grisly business.  An additional motivation toward getting the help of the Persians in the killing was the fact that whoever killed a Jew would get his land.  Haman was efficient in giving notice to every province in the vast kingdom.  But Esther heard of the plot through her maids, and Mordecai notified her that she would have to act fast to somehow persuade the king to change his mind.  They all knew that Haman was behind it.  There was one unfortunate detail of Persian law—once the king makes a law, it cannot be revoked.   Satan had made a cunning move, and it looked like the Jewish people would all be dead soon.

But God knew this ahead of time, and made His own chess moves.  God is always one step ahead.  Why not?  He is the master of the dimension of time.  He knows the entire history of everyone on earth ahead of time.  I can imagine all the future videoclips He could see at the same time.

Esther, I suspect with God’s help, made a brilliant plan.  And in the end, she, with great tears explained it all to Ahasuerus and appealed to the king’s mercy (we all know how women are). Haman made some wrong moves and was hung, Mordecai got the king’s signet ring, and while the king couldn’t change the law, he provided another law that allowed Jews to kill their enemies first!  The Jews were not only honored, but many people changed their religion to worshiping Jehovah.  This happened in the Persian kingdom, which is Iran today.  Can you imagine today’s Iranians giving Jews the right to kill their enemies in Iran and its allies?  For sure, this whole thing was a rarity for the Jews.  God wins, Satan loses.

Attempt #11 and following show Satan’s all-out attempt to kill Jesus, whom he knew was the Messiah from prophecies about His birthplace (Micah 5:2), and by a visit by wise men underneath a supernatural star.

We won’t count as an Attempt how Joseph, when he heard of Mary’s pregnancy, was on the verge of divorcing her as betrothed.  Without such an important element in culture of a man standing up to be a father, the scandal of irresponsible fornication and baby-production would have been much greater.  That would have meant that Jesus would probably have been banned from speaking at any synagogue in the land. His message would never have gone out. In any event, an angel told Joseph in a dream that Mary was still a virgin, and bore a child through the Holy Spirit.  Joseph evidently believed it—so he was definitely the right man for the job of stepfather.

Neither are we going to start with Caesar, who had the brilliant idea that everyone had to be registered in their original home province.  So Joseph and a very pregnant Mary had to travel over bumpy roads on horseback.  This endangered her; a too-early, or even, stillbirth could have resulted.

No, let’s start Attempt #11 with Herod, who was in a lather about the wise men appearing out of the East and asking for the location of the newborn King of the Jews.  Two more dreams were necessary from God, but the wise men never told Herod they had found the Messiah, and Joseph was warned to escape.  So Herod’s cruelty in killing every child age 2 and under in the Bethlehem area did not produce the desired effect. Satan’s Attempt #11:  FAIL.

Attempt #12 was at the very beginning of Jesus’ ministry.  John the Baptist had given Jesus credibility, there was a miracle of wine at Cana, and Jesus was brilliant in initial appearances speaking at synagogues.  But that was it to that point, so He had barely got going.  But Jesus made the “mistake” of informing the synagogue public that ancient prophets spent some time being kinder to Gentiles rather than Jews (Luke 4).  The xenophobic Jews got a demonic gang urge, and almost threw Him off a cliff.  God suddenly engineered a miracle, because it simply says, without explanation, that “passing through the midst of them, He went His way.”  It was also a fact  that Scripture records other instances of men’s desire to kill Him before the mock trial that finally did it.  But Jesus was smart enough to have loving followers around Him during the day, and slip away into remote locations at night. His full message had time to get out. The only way they got to Him was the betrayal of Judas.

Attempt #13 This was Satan’s attempt to drown the Messiah in a huge sea storm on the sea of Galilee, which was notorious for that kind of activity.  But this storm was unusually dangerous and could have been lethal.  Why do I think that Satan was behind this?  Because in Luke 8:24, and Mark 4:39, Jesus “rebuked” the wind and raging water.  A curious word, right? But the word “rebuke” is used in Scripture for deliverance from demons (Matthew 17:18, for instance).  Yes, Satan can figure out how to have his demons make a storm.  But, Jesus can figure out the source, and deliver Himself from the weather.  A great God.

Attempt #14 Satan figured he had Jesus’ number at the Crucifixion.  Even though the witnesses against Him were false, even though Pilate and his wife did everything they could to release Jesus, the Jewish crowd were in a demonic paroxysm again; they wanted to see Jesus dead.  They even preferred to see a murderer released instead of Jesus.  They even cursed themselves, saying (Matthew 27:25) “his blood be on us, and on our children.”  God, in total disgust, rejected these Jews, formerly the “apple of His eye.” Jesus warned them several times about this. God’s judgment came down on those Jews 40 years later.  Under a vicious general Titus, over a million of the Jews were slaughtered in a raid on Jerusalem.  The temple was completely torn down, as Jesus had prophesied.  But Satan was looking only at Jesus; he actually figured that the Crucifixion would do the job; Jesus would stay dead.  But in the greatest triumph of history, Jesus was resurrected, and lives!  Now His Gospel of freedom from sin and resurrection for His followers still abides in a minority everywhere in the world.

Attempt #15 is probably future.  God prophesied, through an allegory in Revelation 12, Satan’s attempt to devour Christ (the Child in Revelation 12;  Satan is the dragon).  In Revelation 12:13, Satan is attacking “the woman,” probably Israel. So Satan will cause many Jews to die.  Other verses suggest God's children (those that believe and follow Christ) will also be heavily persecuted. In other Scripture we find that he is attempting a giant war against Christ and His followers at Har Megiddo, also called Armageddon (Revelation 16:13-16).  But no one can be certain about the future, so I am deliberately sketchy about details.  All I know is that Satan is given one last chance, in some probable future date, as implied in Revelation 12:12, to do his destructive work.  It may come during our lifetimes, it may not.  But he will be a masterful deceiver, so much so that the earth comes under one world ruler and one religion--most people will actually worship an antichrist under Satan’s control!  Many nominal Christians will be fooled, as Matthew 24:24 says about that future day:

….false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

Jesus even began His Olivet Discourse on future events by warning His followers about deception (Matthew 24:4).  He also warned His followers to stay alert and looking for Him, not to be caught up in the ways of the world, which could destroy us. Yes, it is true that Satan looks like the Cleveland Browns, going 0-12, as we showed above, but he is wily and is successful on getting the majority of people to be swayed and hell-bound.  Jesus confirms that in Matthew 7:13-14:

 “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. ¹⁴ Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it

My final word of warning is from II Corinthians 11:13-15:

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. ¹⁴ And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. ¹⁵ Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

Christians, beware!  Do not fall for this upcoming great deception.

Acknowledgement:  Chuck Missler, a great man of God, who is sorely missed by his passing.

Fear of God

 The fear of God is an important, yet little studied topic in sermons. Let’s start by examining Acts 2:41-47, using the New King James (NKJ):

Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. 46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, 47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.

In these verses, we ask, in light of the tremendous power the church had, being close to God, sharing their assets compassionately with one another, and “having favor with all the people”—were any of these wonderful things caused by their fear of God? It did happen, as v. 43 says.  It wouldn’t seem possible—such a negative emotion leading to a good result. Let’s explore this mystery together.

We start by defining the Greek they used for the word “fear:” phobos. (From which we get “phobia”). According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, phobos means (1) “dread, terror, always with this significance in the four Gospels.” Let’s keep that in mind; whenever Jesus is quoted saying “fear,” that’s the meaning. The other meaning of phobos is only a little less intimidating: (2) “reverential fear of God as a controlling motive of the life; in matters spiritual and moral, not a mere fear of His power and righteous retribution, but a dread of displeasing Him.” Examine your hearts: when you're thinking of sinning, do you have a real dread of displeasing Him? Is your fear of what He might do, enough to make you stop? Is the fear of God a controlling motive in your life? I suspect the only thing keeping us back from many sins is the fear of being discovered by our friends or family and losing our reputations, or losing more. The serious dread of displeasing God should be more of a motivation keeping us from sin; but it is often just not there; we just don’t think about Him.

Many sermons are expounded on God’s love, few on His hate--of sin. Many sermons on our loving God, few on fearing Him. This paper will attempt to show just a tad of the many verses there are on how fear of God is good for you. It’s a desirable attribute. Hopefully after reading it you can introspect on His holiness and get to know His “holy side” more. Like medicine, it will seem unpleasant—but it’s good for you. Let’s begin with Genesis 20:11, where Abraham sees the good side of men fearing God: They would be less likely to murder him and take his beautiful wife:

And Abraham said, “Because I thought, surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will kill me on account of my wife.

Just two chapters later, in Genesis 22, God is testing Abraham’s willingness to obey Him implicitly, regardless of how illogical His instructions seem. He is asked to sacrifice his son. Note that Abraham doesn’t delay, doesn’t ask himself: “God wants me to kill my son? The son He promised? Let me argue that, or get a second opinion.” He knew that God loves him, that following Him regardless of logic, even doing things we never imagined we could do, will all turn out well. Have we developed that trait? Look at verse 12 for the result of fear that brings obedience  regardless :

And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”

Note that God commends him on his fear of Him. His fear led him to obey God without question. God respects his obedience, and no harm is done.

In Genesis 31:42a, Jacob has a name for God: The Fear of Isaac. Nowhere does God disapprove of this name. Note how Jacob appreciates this-named God as his God, connecting it with His protection for him overriding the wiles of Laban. Finally note how we have proven that the three patriarchs of Israel, giants in the faith, are all given to fearing God:

Unless the God of my father, the God of Abraham and the Fear of Isaac, had been with me, surely now you (Laban) would have sent me away empty-handed.

In Exodus 1:17, the children of Israel are slaves in Egypt. The pharaoh, fearing their numerical advantage, has instructed the Hebrew midwives to kill the boy babies as soon as they arrive out of the womb. But the midwives refuse to do it—even though disobeying pharaoh endangers their own lives—because of their fear of God (fear of His judgement for murder). Note His blessing on them because their fear of God was greater than their fear of the pharaoh for their disobedience of him.

But the midwives feared God, and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the male children alive... because the midwives feared God…He provided households for them.

Maybe we’d have fewer abortions if the mothers or attending nurses had a real fear of God today. In the 60+ million abortions in the U.S. since Roe v Wade, these women did not have enough fear of God to dread His ultimate punishment for murder. How many have read Galatians 5:21, which says that (unrepentant) murderers “will not inherit the kingdom of God,” and would spend an eternity in hell?  Society may have persuaded these women that abortion--murder--was a good choice. I have no idea what percentage of repentance from that dreaded act happened afterward, but if it's miniscule, that means possibly 60 million women are going to hell.  Unless they truly repented before God, and developed a fear of Him after the abortion, and He forgave them.

In Exodus 14:31, after God’s great plagues, after the exodus, and His killing the pursuing Egyptians, then the children of Israel finally feared the power of God. After that, they really believed Moses and God. So, in subsequent chapters, they expressed enough belief in God, that they obeyed Him  (for awhile), all resulting from their fear of God.

Thus Israel saw the great work which the LORD had done in Egypt; so the people feared the LORD, and believed the LORD and His servant Moses.

In Exodus 18:21, Moses is to select men as judges, an extremely important function. The first requirement for such men? You guessed it; they need to have a fear of God.

Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds…

In Exodus 20:20b, the Ten Commandments are given. The very first words that Moses says to the Israelis at this momentous occasion include the following:

God has come to test you, and that His fear may be before you, so that you may not sin.”

The Ten Commandments is supposed to awaken the soul to a proper fear of God. The Commandments are His rules--but it still takes a consistent fear of God to obey the rules consistently. Once again, God’s Word is saying that fear of God reduces sin.

There are plenty more in the Old Testament, but to make this paper short enough to be readable, let’s skip ahead to the New Testament; what did Jesus say about fear? Matthew 10:28:

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

People experience “peer pressure;” they shrink back from declaring for Christ, particularly in public. And so it was for the Jews, who did not want to go against the Pharisees, who could be a genuine threat to your life if you followed Jesus. But Jesus was unsympathetic for those feelings; He has a stark word (one of many—He talked a lot about hell): basically, "it’s them or me, you can't have both. Follow me, and the worst they can do is take your life. But you get an eternity in heaven. Follow them, you’ll have friends in the world, but then your worry should be about hell—which is forever."

We definitely need an injection of fear for God in this attractive world, to keep us out of hell. (Don’t forget, we said in the two definitions of “fear” that the meaning in the Gospels here is “dread, terror.” Jesus was blunt. Your terror of what God can do to you should be greater than your terror of what people can do to you. People can take your lives, but God can take your eternity).

You want mercy from God? We all should, because the depth and frequency of our sin means we need lots of mercy. Luke 1:50 tells us how to get mercy:

And His mercy is on those who fear Him From generation to generation.

Luke 5:26 gives the peoples’ reaction when they see Jesus healing: Fear. Why does His healing produce that response? Perhaps because of His supernaturalism, of things about God which they do not know.  Also note how this fear causes them to glorify God:.

And they were all amazed, and they glorified God and were filled with fear, saying, “We have seen strange things today!”.

Today we would be more cynical and sophisticated about healings. Which is the better reaction? Note how their fear didn’t stop their glorifying God. Another good result from a supposedly negative emotion (The same thing happens in Luke 7:16).

In Luke 23:40-41, one criminal on a cross next to Jesus rebukes the other. The one who feared God admitted his execution was proper punishment for his deeds.  That's a noble thought--and something few criminals do. He also judged Jesus as innocent, something the people and the Pharisees couldn’t do. Fear of God allows you to judge people properly, and to be humble. Also, wonderfully, the one who feared God got saved. The other one was going to hell.

But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.”

Now we go to the book of Acts. God’s stamp of approval was definitely on the man who was the first Gentile to receive the Gospel preached by Jewish men. Cornelius was that man. How did he get to be first in line for such a wonderful event? Because he feared God, among other positive features. A description of him is in Acts 10:2:

…a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always.

Note that fear of God is listed ahead of his giving to the poor, and ahead of his passion for prayer. I’ve heard lots of sermons on giving and the power of prayer, but none on the power of fearing God.

Once again, for brevity, we have to skip lots of "fear" verses, and move on to the Epistles. In Romans 3, Paul is enumerating the horrible sins of those bound for hell…”Their throat is an open tomb,” etc. He then describes sin that gets worse and worse as men get farther away from God. And how does he end it; what phrase did he use as the worst, the source of all this defiant sin and rebellion? It’s in Romans 3:18 (just before the gospel is explained):

“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

In Romans 11:20-22, Paul is justifying why he is bringing the Gospel to the Gentiles—it was because the Jews (the natural branches of Jesus, the Vine) rejected it and got “broken off” the Vine. So God turned to the Gentiles. But the Gentiles might get haughty (“we’re smarter than the Jews”). His solution for that? They needed to fear God, or else He could cut them off too (God hates pride). Further, note that God is called “severe.” I haven’t heard any sermons on God’s “negative” qualities revealed here:

Because of unbelief they (Jews) were broken off, and you (Gentiles) stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but FEAR. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. 22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.

Does God sound antagonistic there? Well, deal with it; change your definition of God’s love. He is in charge of the universe, and makes the rules. We should be grateful that He reveals Himself to us so we know what to do to get on His good side, and what gets on His holy side.

In II Corinthians 7:1, Paul has the method to be holy (necessary for salvation, as my other blogs discuss): Fear God.

Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

So the fear of God helps us to perfect holiness.  And holiness is necessary to be saved (Hebrews 12:14).  Sounds like the fear of God is necessary to get us on the road to salvation.

In Ephesians 5:21-22, women are going to dislike me for this, but Paul has a solution for women who can’t submit to their husbands because they don’t trust them. Now I realize that there are other qualifiers for wives and husbands, but it clearly says that fear of Him is the key in submitting to one another. I’m reminded of our verses above, where Abraham was ready to do something illogical because he trusted God. And it worked out, because God honored his fear of Him--He made sure all was well. Women, take a hint—trusting your husband despite his obtuseness, is really trusting God, because you’re obeying His commandment to submit. He will honor your trust in Him and make it all work out. The verses are broadened to include all of us acting unselfishly and trusting all the brothers and sisters. One more time--What makes us take a chance and submit to others? Fear of God. I have never heard a sermon on this angle of husbands and wives. Putting these two verses together is called “context.”

…submitting to one another in the fear of God. 22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

Once again, brevity demands a stop. I couldn't cover some other great verses. All you need to do is go to biblegate.com and search the word “fear.” But I think you’ve gotten the message. Fear of God is absolutely necessary to reduce sin and to be more holy, to obey God, and submit to people when you should. A lot more people would be saved if they had this attribute. The only question is, how do we develop this fine characteristic? Here’s a few suggestions: (1) Read more of the Old Testament. Lots of judgment and hellfire for disobedience. Not pleasant, but you need to see how much God hated sin. Don’t fall for the argument, “God was different then.” If you believe that, you haven’t gotten the right message about Jesus, either, so that leads to suggestion (2) Read the Gospels just to study exactly what Jesus said. Do you notice how much He talked about judgment? Well, there you go. God doesn’t change, after all, in how much He hates sin, between Old and New Testaments. Write down everything that suggests what it really takes to be saved (or read my blog on initial and final salvation for a quickie summary). When you’re reading, be careful to “update” Biblical words like “idols.” Maybe you think that’s just for primitive folk, wood and stone. So it doesn't apply to me, you say. But read a Biblical definition of idolatry, then spend some time asking yourself if you’ve been into idolatry, in its modern applications. In other words, spend some time asking yourself about the sins you’ve done, and the effects on the family, placing yourself above God (that’s idolatry). And then think about God, who loves you more than you can imagine, watching you sin. You (and everyone) could do much more with your life if you dedicate yourself 100% to Him. He would make you so happy. So why don’t you? Examine that—is it simple selfishness? Greed? Fear of being laughed at? Then imagine yourself at the judgment seat—we will all be there—when you give your reasons, your lame reasons. What are your Scriptural gifts? You don’t know? Have those gifts been given to God for His use? Do you know what the fruits are, a requirement for you to have them for heaven (John 15:2)? How about your time with God? A person you’re in love with, you talk to daily—how much time do you spend during the week talking with God? Maybe you conclude that you don’t really love Him? That’s not good; read I John when it separates saved vs unsaved, measured by the love you show. It’s never too late to change.

As you can see, lots of Scripture reading and introspection are needed. Please, take time for this. Most people’s mind goes ten different ways when trying to be quiet and meditate on Scripture. Or they sink into this, “I’m just a worm and can’t do anything.” (Maybe appealing for sympathy to get out of being judged worked when you were a kid; it doesn’t work with God). Developing a fear of God would be frowned at by most ministers today, but who cares what they think? Their “moral leadership” is why we’re in a mess in the U.S. Better to read Scripture like the above to get the real truth about qualities God loves to see. Like fearing Him.

The Alarming Growth of Corrosive Teen Pornography

 Some facts (and emotion) about teen pornography--and by the way, for those who assume we're talking about boys, it's a fact that girls have been looking at it more, so don't exclude them from your thinking.  Also, most of these data was before the pandemic, so the increased time kids spend at home would make the data even worse. Most of this data comes from fairly reliable sources, and in context I did not note a tendency to exaggerate to make some agenda or sell something.  

• 93 % of boys and 62% of girls are exposed to internet pornography before the age of 18.  Some of it was a flashing view, followed by guilt and shutting it down.  But the image is often retained in the mind, so they may seek for it later.
• 70% of boys (under 18) have spent at least 30 consecutive minutes looking at on-line porn on at least one occasion.
• 35% of boys have done this on at least ten occasions.
• 67% of children admit to clearing their internet history to hide their online activity (that's not necessarily porn).
• 79% of accidental exposures to internet porn among kids take place in the home.
• On a different note, 56% of divorce cases involve one party having an obsessive interest in online porn.  The reason I mention it is because divorce has a huge effect on children, no matter what age.
• 12% of websites on the internet are pornographic—they own approximately 25 million websites!
• Only 3% of pornographic websites require age verification.
• The most popular day of the week for viewing pornography is Sunday.
• The average age a child first sees internet pornography is 11.  That one is hard to believe, even if it were accidental.

Bevill Associates Forensic Counselors, after surveys, say:

Using data from the Youth Internet Safety Survey, a nationally representative, cross-sectional telephone survey of 1501 children and adolescents (ages 10-17 years), characteristics associated with self-reported pornography seeking behavior, both on the Internet and using traditional methods (e.g., magazines), are:  Only 5% of self-identified seekers being female. The vast majority (87%) of youth who report looking for sexual images online are 14 years of age or older.

It’s projected that virtual reality (VR) porn, which vastly increases pleasure, because "she's right here," should be a $1 billion business by the year 2025. That’s third behind an expected $1.4 billion virtual reality video game market (a first step for online gambling, for many) and $1.23 billion VR NFL-related content.

There was a disconnect between parents’ perceptions of their children’s pornography viewing practices and the reality: 75% of parents felt their child would not have seen pornography online, but of those children, 53% said they had in fact seen pornography. Parents, don't assume that your child is Christian and therefore too righteous for this.

Of the children who admitted to intentionally searching for pornography (n=276), nearly two-thirds of them (63%) said they had done so, for one or more of the four reasons: (1) Ideas for new things to try sexually (2) Learning about sex generally (3) Learning how to get better at sex (4) Learning what people expect from me sexually.  They learn falsely, since much of it degrades and oppresses females, and the so-called actresses pretend to enjoy the roughness.  As a result, boys' expectations from what girls are willing to do for sex may definitely run too high.  Girls in particular mentioned using pornography to learn how to meet boys’ “expectations.”  May God help us.

Overall, 41% of all children who were aware of pornography agreed that “watching porn makes people less respectful of the opposite sex.”  Actually, that's too low of a number.  That means lots of boys will objectify females, which starts a slide into sociopathic behavior in many cases.  Rape will become more common.

Given that 63% of children aged 11 to 13 who had seen pornography said their first exposure had been unintentional, age-verification is likely to have a significant impact here--if our government would actually enforce laws against obscenity.  If they would pay attention to the corrosion against society from perverseness and criminality that arises from addiction, the government could shut most of this down, very easily.  Parents need to use this data and others, and raise their voices to members of Congress.  83% of parents agreed with the statement “there should be robust age-verification controls in place to stop children (under-18s) seeing commercial pornography online.”  But let's see those 83% do something about it. Source: Report on People, Pornography & Age Verification (bbfc, January 2020)

• A study analyzing videos from Pornhub and Xvideos found that 97 percent of the targets of violence and/or aggression were  women. (We're not just talking bondage here.  Unfortunately, I can't describe these things.)  This was found in Archives of Sexual Behavior, A Descriptive Analysis of the Types, Targets, and Relative Frequency of Aggression in Mainstream Pornography July 13, 2020) 
• According to a survey by the research company Savanta ComRes last year, 38% of women under the age of 40 have experienced unwanted slapping, choking, gagging or spitting during consensual intercourse. Deepfake pornography (another woman in place of the original "actress") accounts for a significant majority (96%) of deepfake videos online. (Deeptrace, 2019).

80% of Pornhub’s worldwide visits are now coming from smartphones and tablets. (Source: PornHub website, 2019)

Some additional readings for you that don't all directly involve teens, which you might file under "possible future behaviors." Oh, yes, when they don't seem to give you the source, just click on the underlined blue to get it:

• The Porn Epidemic: Facts, Stats and Solutions (Josh D. McDowell, 2018)
• More than four in 10 Americans (43%) now say pornography is morally acceptable, a seven-percentage-point increase from last year. (Gallup, June 2018)
• One researcher called children’s unlimited access to extreme and graphic internet pornography, “the largest unregulated social experiment in history.” 
• Researchers at the University of Massachusetts at Boston performed a Google trend analysis showing searches for “teen porn” more than tripled between 2005-2013. Americans are becoming more and more attracted to pornography depicting sex with underage persons and this growing exposure to increasingly deviant porn is driving more criminals toward victimizing more teenagers.
• Free access means porn use has skyrocketed.
• Here's a website that reports people are suing Mindgeek's X sites.  (There are no offensive views on this article--I suggest, though, viewing it in an incognito window).  Unfortunately, the lawsuit is only because they audaciously sent people non-consensual videos depicting rape and child abuse.  Unfortunately, because of the limited area of lawsuits, that still means depicting violence among adults, where they pretend to enjoy it, is still OK.  The site: https://www.techspot.com/news/90312-porn-site-xtube-shutting-down-wake-lawsuit-against.html
• The use of filters by parents has not worked.  It's easy to get around them, as I have unfortunately proven as well. Parents need help from laws and enforcement and fines to the sources of this evil.  Harmful Effects of Pornography: 2016 Reference Guide, (Fightthenewdrug.org, 2016)
• (January 2016) "Falling In Love With Screens: The science behind how double-clicking for sex rewires our brains—and affects us all".
• Those who frequently consume Internet pornography are less likely to marry because they see pornography as a sexual gratification substitute. No judgement:  takes away from the bother and the anxiety. Many of the young men have had terrible experiences while dating in the past. Malcolm, M. & Naufal, G. (2014) “Are Pornography and Marriage Substitutes for Young Men?” Institute for the Study of Labor.
• There is a positive correlation between hours of pornography consumed and higher narcissism levels. Additionally, those who have ever used pornography had higher levels of all three measures of narcissism than those who have never viewed Internet pornography. Kaspera, T., Shorta, M. & Milam, A. (2014) “Narcissism and Internet Pornography Use.” Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy. Vol. 41 (5)
• Extramarital sex is one of the most commonly cited reasons for divorce, and Pornography consumption is correlated with positive attitudes towards extramarital affairs. Wright, P., Tokunaga, R. & Bae, S. (2014) “More Than a Dalliance? Pornography Consumption and Extramarital Sex Attitudes Amoung Married U.S. Adults.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture.
• The United States is the largest producer and exporter of hardcore pornographic DVDs and web material.  http://familysafemedia.com/pornography_statistics.html#important_countries(accessed June 6, 2014). Pornographic web pages by country are U. S. 244,661,900(89%) and Germany 10,030,200 (4%)

•  

Where previous generations were cautious of a stolen Playboy magazine, current parents are looking for guidance on how to shield their teens from the ever available, internet pornography. Consider the amount of hours teenagers spend on screens for entertainment--we're talking 9 hours a day according to a report from Common Sense Media. Parents got the short end of teens' attention.  They often would never seek a parent for advice.  Parents, you need to get out of this broken-down cultural "standard."

A study conducted by JAMA Psychiatry looked at the connection between compulsive viewing of online pornography and brain changes. Their results indicated alarming similarities between individuals who view online pornography for hours each week and individuals addicted to drugs or alcohol.

Mothers and fathers of teens: I have one question--Is there a way that your child is one of these problems?  Most parents don't really know; their teens are fiercely guarding their "privacy."  In many cases, it's privacy so they can sin.

I have a harder question:  If both you and your spouse are working in the same daytime period, is it worth sacrificing what this might be doing to your child, just so you can obtain extra money, so you can buy "toys" (bigger house, nicer car) you love and covet?   What I'm saying is, one of you  needs to quit the job to guide the teen away from sin and form a permanent bond, to let the child know you care. You do want your child to live a Scriptural and pure life? Then you should be willing to sacrifice your quest for the "good life."  The teen will pick up on this moral courage and asceticism, and respect you, and learn to sacrifice where necessary when he/she becomes an adult.  (They're less likely to shove you off to assisted living when you're older--long range benefits!) 

Let's face it:  Teens lie.  In America today, they live for their impulses.  I'm saying, after you sacrificially quit that job, when you're around at home, let your movements be unpredictable--don't be afraid to snoop.  (Of course, psychologists today suggest that that's not a good idea, it "destroys trust," and you're stating a negative about the child's personality.  Bologna. Psychologists have caved in to the naive belief that "it's just adolescence, it's just a part of growing up," etc ad nauseum.  Read the data above again, before you cave to your teen. Harden them to self-discipline and restraint. Remember, your job is not to be their friend. If you plan on going out for awhile, your teenager might want you to cite a specific time of your return.  Be vague. He or she may have something sexual in mind. Surprise them by only being gone for 45 minutes or so.  If you find them in a compromised state, drive for their true confession and repentance. Remind them of that from time to time later.  Put the name of God out there.

Then there's the possibility of teens having sex while both parents are at work.  I suspect this is happening a lot, looking at the spiraling statistics of people getting married later and later. (The pandemic probably made this a bigger problem.)  By the way, facts say that fewer teens are getting pregnant.  Don't assume they're more pure. Given the outrageous music and suggestive clothing, it's more likely that they have simply gotten easier access to birth control pills.  Teens (and parents, sometimes) don't seem to care about what the Bible says about sex with anyone outside marriage.  God's Word is blunt: hell for those who violate this commandment  GalatIans 5:19-21 says: 

 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

So fornication, which is so widespread in TV and movies (streamed or otherwise), has suckered many Christians to believe that it's not so important anymore.  But note in the verses above that fornication, in God's judgment, ranks up there with murder and idolatry.  Think about that.  TV and movies are our culture now and in the future.  They reach their dirty fingers in our thinking and radicalize it more than we know. 

Now if your porn-loving teen has a conscience, they may repent, momentarily, but for most it is repentance light, since most don't take serious-enough steps to stop completely  their growing addiction to sex or pornography. (By the way, assuming that "relief" (if you know what I mean) by watching porn will decrease the desire for sex has been proven wrong by lots of studies.) 

Many teens will view porn more when they're depressed or isolated.  (Like all addictions do). Watch for the teens' state of mind when they only occasionally--hopefully--reach this state.  Praying with them (yes, with them) will help more than you know.

There are also  lots of studies that show seriously negative effects on married life from previous porn addiction.  The excuse that couples give for living together before marriage (which is becoming a new norm), is "we have to know whether we are compatible sexually."  But studies show that living together before marriage leads to more divorces than not doing it! Again, statistics reveal the truth in God's laws, and again psychologists are wrong--but that doesn't change their minds.  God will make us pay for breaking His laws.  Also, these couples are hardening their hearts against God, and salvation will be much harder.  That means many of them are still on the way to hell.

Jesus said thinking about a woman for adultery is adultery in the heart (Matthew 5:28).  And if you, in your crooked mind, imagine scenarios of "hooking up" with a co-worker or whoever, but don't actually do it, do you think that you get off scot-free?  No, it means you're not paying attention about Jesus' commands that evil thought is sin too. He says to hate someone--and you haven't done anything to them--can send you to hell, too!  Read I John 2:9:

He who says he is in the light (i.e., following Jesus) and hates his brother, is in darkness until now. 

"In darkness" can only be interpreted as bound for hell, unless there is sincere repentance.

Parents, beware!  You are responsible for your children.  If one of you is afraid of quitting that job, that I've been harping on, hoping to get more worldly pleasures and things, don't be surprised if the teen can catch the drift and take on the ways of the world as well. Scripture says, those who love the world and it's pleasures, cannot go to heaven I John 2:15:

Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 

IF you believe Scripture is really God's Word to mankind, and considering the way the culture puts pressure on teens, then you will make necessary sacrifices to keep your kids off these paths that lead to hell.  

Remember, Scripture advises us to fear God, who will judge you for making decisions (or not making decisions) that put your child on the wrong path. Here are some more simple rules for the Prophet Parent: don't let your child put a lock on his/her bedroom door, and don't be afraid to enter unannounced.  On occasion, check the room contents.  Here's the best--and scariest--idea of all:  Get rid of the phones!  The possibility of their watching mobile sex, and the isolation from normal social relationships, should be motivation enough.  Then there is the extra time they could have--they could be doing something constructive--should give you courage to do that.  There is plenty of proof that teens' ability to focus, to do critical thinking, and to handle themselves in society have both gone downhill fast.  Remember, the more your child screams against these invasions from you as Prophet Parent, the more likely they are deeply doing sinful things, or things that will pervert their normal social relationships.

In an interesting study, researchers found a sudden increase in teens'  suicide risk factors and suicide rates in 2012 — around the time when smartphones became popular, says Jean Twenge, one of the authors of the study.

Twenge's research found that teens who spend five or more hours per day on their devices are 71 percent more likely to have one risk factor for suicide. And that's regardless of the content consumed. Whether teens are watching cat videos or looking at something more serious, the amount of screen time — not the specific content — goes hand in hand with the higher instances of depression.

Covid has more than likely increased children screen time, making all these factors worse.  Actual data for 2020-2021 to prove or disprove this idea are impossible, since data for those years haven't been released.

Parents, pray about this!  In the old days, I, as a parent of children, didn't want to be "square."  But the way things are going, parents need to purify themselves, be truly Christian, and be a model for teens