Sunday Stories – Set-Apart Living Pt. 2

New Blog Schedule

Introduction

Last time on Sunday Stories, we talked about set-apart living and what it is and is not. This week’s focus will be on how we can go about a set-apart life practically. It does us no good to know what something means if we don’t also know how to utilize what we know, so this second piece is an indispensable part of the discussion.

What Does Set-Apart Living Mean Practically?

Set-apart living is going to look a little different in practicality for each of us. For me, God has nudged me to eliminate certain books that are likely to contain content of an impure nature and to spend more time listening to or reading biographies and autobiographies of Christians who did live a set-apart life to Christ. The reading content I have removed led only to temptations to sully my mind and soul, which should be an inner sanctuary for my Savior. However subtle the impurity and however “clean” the immorality’s nature is compared to the worst the world can offer, books that are heavy in this content or that are focused on it present the encouragement to sin. So, as Scripture says to lay aside every weight and the sin that so easily besets us, God drew me to eliminating the temptation. But He didn’t just draw me toward eliminating the temptation and then leave that space a vacuum that could be filled with other temptations. Instead, He drew me to filling that extra space in my reading time with Christian autobiographies and biographies that could encourage me in my walk with Him instead of tearing me down. Furthermore, He has also convicted me of things I spend too much time doing, even though they aren’t bad, and that has led to placing limitations on my writing time. I only write two hours a day, at most, instead of writing every spare moment. This leaves me with time to focus on His word and prayer as well as time to spend with those who can help encourage me in my walk with Him.

For you, it might be the same, but it’s highly likely that it’s something else. Maybe it’s a friendship that doesn’t point you closer to Christ. Maybe it’s cutting back on social activities to ensure you can make Him a priority. For every individual, it’s a little different, but the outflow of those changes is the same: a clearly set-apart, different life that reflects the nature of the One we are walking closely with.

Signposts of a Set-Apart Life

As a natural outflow of the changes in our focus, attitude, and hearts, our lives will begin to show clear differences from the world. As Romans 8:7-10 says, the spirit and the flesh are in enmity. They cannot coexist. Those who live in the Spirit, set-apart to God, display the qualities of their Master, Christ. They exude an unusual peace, joy, and confidence. They aren’t perfect, but they seem to have an inner radiance that is unexplained by any worldly lifestyle or standard. 

Another sign of a set-apart life that, though the person is not living in sin or in anything worthy of reproach, they are still ridiculed. For example, young people who choose to honor God and their future spouse by staying pure physically and emotionally are mocked, and these days, it isn’t just the world that does the mocking. It can even be people within the church who should have been supporting and guiding, not discouraging and rebuking. If you take a strong view on sin? You’re seen as being intolerant. Refuse to abide bad language, crude jokes, and inappropriate behavior, you’re a prude or a goody-two-shoes. 

Choosing to live the right way out of genuine love for our Lord will give us an inner loveliness, but the world doesn’t value that sort of beauty and so, as a whole, will deride, dismiss, and detest it in others because it brings conviction and uncomfortability simply by existing and refusing to take part in the unholy activities of the world or by giving up behaviors and things that pull us away from God.

The Character of a Set-Apart Life

But a set-apart life is also characterized by a spirit of meekness and love. One who is walking in the Spirit and living holy before God is one who adorns the Gospel of Christ and makes it lovely. This means that, even when we must tell someone they are doing wrong according to the Scripture, we do it in a way that is tempered with grace and love. A set-apart Christian is one God is teaching daily to approach those around them with gracious truth. 

Those who are living in Christ may at times have to take a firm stand against sin (in fact, it is inevitable that this will happen). But when they do so, the attitude in which they do it will be markedly different from those who are following a list of rules. There will be not only Bible behind what they say but also a spirit of humility. At times, the truth must be stated bluntly. As Proverbs says, there is a time to answer the fool according to his foolishness. But most of the time, in dealing with the world around us, harshness under the guise of being blunt is the MO of Christians who have the right doctrine but are not approaching those erring from that doctrine or those truths in a humble, love-centered mindset.

On the flip side, there are those who sacrifice the truth because they would prefer not to offend in the name of “love”. A set-apart Christian is prone to one or the other of these areas as much as any Christian, but their lives will reflect the balance Christ had in His approach to people. At times, a stern rebuke may be called for so long as it is done from a heart of humility and concern for God’s glory as well as for that person. But at other times, a stern rebuke would do more damage than good, and a soft answer is necessary. Only the life that is walking in step with Christ will reflect the balanced approach needed to respond to both individuals and situations in a Christ-like manner.

The Conversation of a Set Apart Life

Often, though we may face social disdain and ridicule from society, I have found in my life that when I am walking close to God and focusing on Him, it comes out in my conversations with unbelievers in a way that results not in scorn but instead in either bewilderment or appreciation. This isn’t because I’m somehow finding a magical formula for approaching others. It’s simply because when I’m walking close to God and my mind is focused on God, my view of people is aligned with His view of people. He died for sinners, and I am talking to sinners (whether saved or not). Should my actions not reflect the same love of Christ that was both meek and lion-hearted at the same time? Should my discussions with non-believers not reflect His firm remark to the woman at the well regarding her sin but also His gentleness with the sinners He came to save?

More often than not, it is those who are religious and have become puffed up in their own perceived righteousness that are most critical and cruel to those living in sin or even in some perceived “error”, and they, like the Pharisees, must be firmly rebuked.

But those who are un-believers? I have often received the comment that I was “not what they expected” or that even though I stand for my beliefs and am firm on the Bible, I am “more open-minded than most conservative Christians”. They define conservative Christians as harsh, unfeeling, uncaring, and prideful. At times I have been all of those things, and I know this response from any unbeliever I may come into contact with is through no merit of my own. In and of myself, I can be exactly what they believe all conservative Christians are: unduly judgmental, harsh, critical, and unloving in the way I present the truth. I naturally lean toward the side that is inclined to look at those living lives not in line with Scripture and to turn my nose up at them. But God has shown me a better way and has patiently worked on me (and still is working on me) to develop His purity, holiness, and loveliness in me and in the way that I interact with people. 

The God-Given Encouragement in Living a Set Apart Life

My point in saying this is to simply encourage you that though the world’s system will mock you and many individuals may also do so, there will be those in your workplace, your school, and your neighborhood that take notice when God is shaping your words, actions, and attitudes. And they will not only take notice, but they will appreciate it. They will be more willing to ask you to pray for them and for those they care about. They will understand that somehow, you are an individual that is close to Him. They censor their behavior too, in many cases. 

I’ve seen this time and time again in my life and that of others. Many of the people I know refrain from swearing around me because they’ve noticed that I don’t swear. A few weeks to a month ago, my coworkers and I were discussing the issues with the virus, and I mentioned that if you’re feeling ill and have symptoms, you should get tested. I stated that I’d been ill over one weekend and had gone to get tested because I didn’t know what was causing the issue.

I felt better the next day (and didn’t have the virus, as it turned out), but I went anyway just in case. My boss remarked that many people my age can’t tell the difference between being hungover, allergies, and actually having the virus. But she followed it up by saying, “Of course, we know your problem isn’t going to be a hangover.”

They knew that to be true because of looking at how I talk, dress, act, and live my life. They knew that because of my stance on the Bible, I wouldn’t do certain things, and drinking is one of them because I don’t want to open any door for Satan to gain a foothold through insobriety and drunkenness. My hope is that all of those in my life see Christ in me and that with each passing day, the image of my Lord and Savior grows clearer. But if I’m not living a set-apart life, that will not be true of me.

The Power to Live a Set Apart Life

Of course, we wouldn’t fully cover the topic if we didn’t take a moment here at the end to focus on where the power to do this comes from. It can never come from us because in and of ourselves we are unholy, unlovely, and thoroughly sin-stained creatures. Instead, the power to live the kind of set-apart life that honors God comes from living in Him and in His power.

It comes from walking closely with Him and from going to him for strength every day whether we are struggling with any given temptation or not. It comes from our relationship with our King and Heavenly Father, not from within ourselves. It comes from listening closely to the voice of the Holy Spirit as He does His work to guide us through God’s Word and through the conscience that God has given each and every one of us.

The moment that we allow any hint of pride to creep in and begin to believe that we have the strength in ourselves to achieve this set-apart life of purity and holiness is the moment that we lose the battle. Our greatest enemy is our own flesh in so many instances, and the only way we can combat it is if we’re living out our position in Christ.

Conclusion

A set-apart life isn’t easy. There must be sacrifices to live in step with a holy God. While our salvation is secured by grace through faith and can never be lost no matter how heinous the sin (See 1 & 2 Corinthians for an example), our fellowship and friendship with God can be broken if we clutter our lives with unholy things, idols of any shape or form, sin of any sort, or so much busyness that God is pushed off to only when we can “make time” for Him.

But as much as a holy life isn’t easy, the worth of it is beyond measure. It’s worth any cost. If you’ve been on the fence on the matter of set-apart living, I encourage you to take the first steps toward it. Spend some time in serious prayer asking God to show you what He would have you to remove or to add, and ask Him to soften your heart toward Him. This soul-searching should be coupled with His Word to shine a spotlight on your soul and any areas of your heart and life that need cleansing.

If there are things you already know need to go, get rid of them and put down some boundaries in those areas that will help you to ensure you don’t let those things creep back in. A holy, set-apart life is of immeasurable value. Don’t let it pass you by because you bought into the lies of an unholy, ungodly culture around you.

Sunday Stories – Set-Apart Living Pt. 1

Ariel Paiement

Introduction

One of the things I’ve been thinking about—and have been finding God poking at me about recently—is the idea of being set apart to Him. All too often in life, it’s easy to become so busy and so focused on our goals that we, as Christians, crowd God out. Even though the activities themselves may not be wrong, in and of themselves, if they’re putting God in second place or causing us to “fit” God in, then they’re getting in the way of a life that is holy (or set apart) before God. This will be a two-part series since I know there’s a lot of information here. This week, we’ll focus on the definition of set-apart living, why it matters, and what it isn’t. Next week, we’ll talk about how we can practically live a set-apart life according to Scripture as Christians in an increasingly hostile world.

How Do I Define Set-Apart Living?

It’s important to note here that, while set-apart living is often discussed in the arena of sexual purity or encouraging kids not to do drugs and drink, that is not all there is to it or even the main focus that we should have in discussing the subject. Sometimes some speakers or pastors will talk about it in a broader sense. Here I’m going to talk about it in the broader definition. I define set-apart living as living a life that is focused entirely on God. Set-apart living or living a holy life is living within the world but not being of the world. A person living this sort of life is going to look markedly different in their daily lives from someone who is not living set-apart to God. They won’t do, say, or listen to the same things as the world around them does. To those who do not see them frequently, the difference in their way of living may not be, immediately, clear. To those who see them every day, however, it is obvious that they are not the same and that the difference can only be attributed to a close, personal walk with God, not mere religion or personality.

What Does It Matter?

These days, not many appreciate a man or woman who has wholly given themselves to God. People who do so are often called radicals or, worse yet, cult leaders. I know a few good Christian leaders that have been accused of that. It has usually been on the grounds that they’ve chosen to live a life that exemplifies high standards of purity that “no one can expect to achieve” or that they preach a lifestyle that can be lived without knowing sin in God’s power.

And yet, these radicals and “cult leaders” do manage to achieve these standards by the grace of God. They are not perfect, and they do sin. However, they are not living in a lifestyle that encourages or fosters it, and they have removed the hindrances that might cause them to stumble in their walk with God or stagnate in the same. As such, the work He has done through their ministries is nothing short of astounding in most cases.

It has been my observation that many Christian leaders wish they’d see this success, but they rob themselves of it because they focus on everything they’re doing for God but forgo a focus on the One they’re doing it for. They talk well, but they do not practice the principles laid out for those wishing to see God move in their lives. They do not seek to utterly remove self from the equation so that in every way they may exemplify Christ, and so they meet with mediocre success.

Even in the church, it’s common to get weird looks from people if you choose to live entirely set apart to God. You don’t have to live like a monk in a monastery to get those looks, by the way. Things as simple as refusing to make fun of someone, not engaging in gossip, or refusing to watch, listen to, or read even certain “Christian” things are enough in many cases. 

Given the Reasons to Bother

So, in a world that doesn’t value any semblance of godly living and with a church that is increasingly following suite, what’s the point? Why bother with this at all instead of just going with the rest of the world and much of the church in deciding that holy, godly living is impossible and entirely unnecessary?

The obvious reason, to me, is that we are to seek God’s approval, not men’s applause (Gal. 1:10). We are bought with a price, according to 1 Corinthians 6:20, and we are no longer our own but His. If we are truly His, then, there ought to be a desire within us to live a life pleasing to Him and to be in fellowship with Him, not with the world. This does not mean, of course, that we never fall or that we never choose sin over God. We, like the Israelites, sin time and again. But a Christian who is living in the Spirit and not according to the flesh is able to feed themselves in the Word and is convicted by God of that sin. A Christian living carnally or in the flesh is unable to feed themselves in the Word and needs to be rebuked for failing to follow even the most obvious of commands (See 1 and 2 Corinthians for an example of a church in this state). The Bible has a great deal to say to Christians about living in the Spirit instead of the flesh, and it is clear that we, even as His children, have the choice to live in sin. But a believer who is rooted in Him and exemplifies Paul’s prayer for the Ephesians, in Ephesians 1:16-23, will not live in sin forever. The fellowship they have known is broken when they live in sin, and those who have known that fellowship feel its loss keenly. They, then can continue in sin only if they sear their conscience and grieve the Spirit.

This then leads to the other reason which, though not our main focus as Christians, is no less important to our lives than the first was. The second reason that set-apart living matters is because it brings life more abundant. It brings a life that, while it is not always free of hardship and persecution, is filled with peace, joy, and fulfillment as you walk with Him. So, the only reason we need for why this matters is that He saved us to Himself and asks it of us, He also promises us blessings and more, beyond the already immense kindness he showed in saving our souls from damnation.

If we are His, adopted into His family through grace, then we are no more the servants of sin but are instead the servants of God. This matters because true Christians can never be content living in known sin without searing their conscience and grieving the Holy Spirit. Paul warns us not to do this very clearly in Ephesians 4:30. It brings grief to God’s heart when we choose the world’s way after all He did to free us from that into a better way in Him. We are, therefore, called on to live lives set apart to God even as we live in the midst of a wicked, corrupt world, and so we then must sin if we put anything before Him. 

There is no sin we can do that is greater than robbing God of His rightful place and His glory in our lives. To do so is to deny the Creator His rights and our God His temple (1 Cor. 3:10-23). The other sins that we often focus on in the church, such as sexual immorality, drunkenness, addictions to drugs, and other “big ticket” sins, are (though clearly wrong and denounced in Scripture) merely the outgrowth of a life that is not given over to God. It is a life that is putting self and flesh on the throne, not God and Spirit.

These sins have no place in the Spirit-filled Christian life. If seen, other Christians, living in the Spirit, are instructed to go to them in love and rebuke the behavior so that they may turn around before they face the fullness of God’s corrective power in their lives (1 Cor. 5). These Christian brothers and sisters who are rebuked may not return immediately, but those who are truly His will return.

When they do, we are to greet those who do return not as though they are unbelievers but as brothers (2 Cor. 2:5-11; James 5:19-20). So then, choosing to live a life to ourselves, in any area, is to refuse our Lord His rightful place, and to worship anything (self, things, or people) above God is idolatry. As such, living a life set-apart to Him matters for these reasons: we are called to it, we are bought with a price and are not our own, we cannot be wholly blessed if we do not live in Him, and we sin if we place anything above Him in our lives.

What Set Apart Living Is Not

We’ve talked about what set-apart living is and why it matters, but I would be remiss if I didn’t touch on what set-apart living isn’t. Often, the object to holiness or set apartness is that it might lead—or must lead in the minds of some—to austere, monk-like living. While not everyone has this objection and some are honest enough to admit they simply prefer living their way instead of God’s way, many of us who started out more like the Corinthian believers and have had to be brought into this set-apart living by God’s firm but loving hand went through the fears that we would lose friends, might have to give up everything to go sit in a cave somewhere to read our Bibles all day, or might need to become monks. While these fears are blown out of proportion a bit, some people really do have these concerns. Some of us have sat there and thought, “Set apart living is impossible because there’s no way I can spend five or six hours a day just reading and praying.” 

The fact of the matter is that isn’t what set-apart living is. Many of the men and women we see in both segments of Christianity lived lives that, while centered on God, involved regular jobs and living in a society that didn’t want them there because they were considered “radical”. God calls on us to live in the Spirit, to be transformed into His likeness, and not to be conformed to the world. He does not say “Dress in sackcloth, eat nothing but the simplest food you can find, and never do anything but read your Bible and pray.”

The Heart of the Issue

While some people genuinely are unsure of what it means to live a set-apart life and are worried they won’t be able to do so and live life too, the real issue is all too often not what we will or will not have to give up in particular. Instead, many who object to set-apart living object because they realize that a set apart life means dying to self. They’re okay with giving up things they think would be good things to give up to show how good they are as people. Some of them may even genuinely believe that giving up things while still living for themselves is living a life that’s “good enough”. But while these people may look good on the outside, if you start talking to many of them about areas of life they don’t want to give up but that are not in line with the Bible, the responses are rarely good. They can range from “Well, that’s not really necessary for today” to “I don’t think God cares” to “That’s one of those outdated things that only old-fashioned or holier-than-thou types do.” This is, of course, by no means a complete list of excuses we as human beings can come up with for why we don’t need to remove the things God has told us to remove. My own excuses usually have been along the lines of “Well, it’s not that bad” or “I’m not doing this really bad thing, so this one little compromise isn’t really a problem”. But they all boiled down to “I want to do this, and I don’t care if God cares or not.”

Living a set apart life will mean giving up the self-focused life and suffering ridicule for the things we choose to omit to make our focus our King instead of ourselves. That much is a guarantee. And too often, we have no desire to put God in charge because we’ll lose friends, activities, or things that we want more than close friendship with our Lord.

Conclusion

What a sad state of affairs when even some who claim the name “Christian” prioritize friends, things, and their own pursuits over the One who died one of the worst deaths known to man to rescue our souls from eternal damnation. He did all of that so we could have eternal fellowship with Him! At times, I daresay, we have all been guilty of doing this, but it should be the exception, not the rule, friends. Could we deliver any more sound a slap to the face of God than to accept His grace but then refuse to give anything of ourselves in a spirit of love, duty, and gratitude to our Savior? More and more of late, God has been showing me that He is not just Savior. He is also Lord and Master, titles which demand our respect and our devotion, not just a vague sense of gratitude for what He did with zero inclination to live as He has required.

Sunday Stories: Christianity and Racism

New Blog Schedule

Introduction

Right up front, I’ll warn you this post is going to be long. To answer the questions I’m going to discuss here thoroughly, I’ll need you to bear with me. The argument I’m going to present takes some set up, and so I hope you’ll stick with me as I go through the necessary background information to get to the argument and the answer to the questions I’m going to present. Furthermore, for those who may be liberals in my audience, understand up front that I do not support racism in any way, shape, or form. I’m about to go through why. I’m hoping you’ll track with me on this one, though, because I’m about to go through the moral, historical, and ideological grounds that lead to racism. I’ve spoken to various liberals about why they believe what they do regarding racism, and I often hear good reasons with very, very inconsistent and bad logic. It’s entirely possible to be right and be completely inconsistent in your viewpoints, and that’s where most liberals I’ve spoken to are at. We’ll dive into why in this article, but please read with an open mind.

Why We Need to Discuss This in the Church and With Our Kids

I genuinely believe that the ideologies that most of our culture has bought into from a moral standpoint and from a worldview standpoint have led to the problems we are seeing today. If you look at history and where other countries who have adopted America’s current philosophies as pushed by the radical far left movement, the end result has always been the breakdown of all three areas of authority that God put into place: State (human government), church, and family. It happened in Russia, Nazi Germany, Italy under Mussolini, Cuba, Venezuela, China, North Korea, Prussia, and many other places in both geographical and historical locations. Right now, our country’s liberals are praising those like Stalin and Mussolini. Mussolini’s reign of terror was short-lived compared to some dictators, but in twenty-one years of power, he killed two-thousand political opponents and an estimated 430,000 people total died under his regime. Stalin was responsible for killing an estimated twenty million or more, according to many historians. Stanford historian, Norman Naimark, considers Stalin’s mass murders to be genocide and states that Stalin and Hitler have more in common than many of us in modern day culture seem to believe. These are the men we’re seeing the Democrat party praising or aspiring to be like. They want the same system of government that these men wanted and used. They’re repeating the same trends that past dictators did. Arguably, so are some of the far right radicals in office as well. Both are incredibly dangerous.

But if we don’t educate ourselves on history, we don’t see the trends. We ignore those who lived for many years in countries who have done all the same things we’re now doing thanks to the liberal, progressive agenda, and even though they express the fear they feel over seeing us doing what their governments did on the intentional path to dictatorships and communism, we scoff as if somehow they’re nutcases. If we don’t know what those who believed what we’re now espousing and hailing as forward thinking had to say about their goals with their philosophies, the things that were inseparable in their minds from their theories, and the ways in which those who followed after their founders chose to apply them, we’re going to be very easily led astray. Our young people are already being misled and taught lies. They’re swallowing it because we’re not teaching them any differently. They’re swallowing it, and we’re playing into the hands of our enemies. Outright communists in our country have the confidence to tell those of us who fight back: “Good job finding all of the links between communism and what we’re doing here. You’ve done your research. But it won’t matter. We’re going to win because we have your children.”

This isn’t something out of a crazy conspiracy novel. I wish it were! If it were, I could laugh it off and roll my eyes at the crazy people who believe this. But when you examine the history, the evidence, and what’s going on right now in our country, you can no longer dismiss what is happening. There is a very real battle going on, folks. And while it’s tempting to look at the rioting and looting around us and say that’s the battle, the battle goes far beyond that. It is a battle of ideologies, and right now, those who are prevailing hold a distinctly anti-God, anti-American, and anti-freedom perspective. We’re going to discuss why any of that matters.

Who Is This Mainly Geared Towards?

I would be remiss, at this point, if I didn’t say something about who this is geared towards. To some of you in my audience, you’re already yawning and rolling your eyes or becoming extremely incensed, if you even made it this far. Some might be considering saying a few nasty things because they think I’m insane at this point. That’s a risk I knew I’d be taking if I chose to speak out on this issue. But I’m going to do it anyway because this is so incredibly important for the Church to consider and understand.

To some of you, it might even sound like a wonderful thing to destroy every principle our country stands on. I am not naive enough to believe that every liberal individual out there is simply unaware of what’s going on, the agenda that the Democrat platform is truly pushing behind the scenes, or the implications of what they believe. I have to give those in the liberal camp credit: not all of them are being misled. Some of them are doing the misleading.

If you haven’t figured it out by now, my main focus here is on Christians no matter what side of the fence they’re on politically. Those who are believers, who have given their lives to Christ, and who have chosen to–in some way, at least–live for Him. Those who are non-religious, only believe when it’s convenient, or who are merely religious as opposed to living out the natural results of a heart fully surrendered to its Creator and King? You are all welcome. It is not my intent to tell you not to read on or to tell you that you aren’t welcome to read what I have to say here. But my focus is on my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ because the trends I see in the Church today both horrify and devastate me. At times, it can feel as if I’m on an island and am the only one in the Church who is seeing the horrific direction that Christ’s Bride, who is to be unspotted by the world, has taken. I know I’m not, but I also know that fewer and fewer Christians, regardless of what they think politically, are a) really redeemed sinners who are living in the Spirit of God and b) walking with God in a relationship with Him once they are redeemed. We have conformed to the world around us instead of being transformed into the likeness of Christ through the renewing of our minds in the Word of God.

Probably Stepping on Toes

I’m likely making some people very angry right now, but here’s the thing… Those of us on the conservative side have historically chosen to give up, not stand up, and to just stand aside as those who hate our country’s founding principles keep taking ground from us. If no one is willing to tell the truth, we will become a country living in deceit, lies, and misdirection (more so than we already are). Some who have been misguided will someday wake up and see what’s happened, and they’ll wonder how everything good they truly thought they were fighting for could’ve been destroyed. I pity those individuals, and I pray we never end up there. But if the Church and those who know where the philosophies being taught by a society running to destruction will end don’t choose to stand up? We will end up where every other country doing what we are has ended up: ruined, without the equality for all that the radicals claimed they wanted, and wondering how we lost our freedoms so quickly.

Most people on the opposite side of the political spectrum from me will boo even literal quotes, which reveal uncomfortable truths, from people they hail as heroes. I’ve watched it happen. I have watched as various conservative blacks around the country have tried to warn their community about the facts. I’ve watched as those people, who have a heart for their communities and want to end the Democratic party’s manipulation of their communities, have been silenced, booed even before they’ve done anything but give statistics, and told they’re not “truly Black” if their opinion doesn’t fit the Democrat party’s narrative. Really? Really, guys? Could this behavior be any more childish and willfully blind? And lest you think I somehow believe just the Black liberals do this? It’s been done to me by white liberals who presume they can speak for the whole Black community because they’re “allies”. I’m the enemy because I listed stats or because I dared to ask them to provide proof on any specific area that there’s a real instance of racism going on. Some of you may be preparing to retaliate against the things I’ve already said or will consider it by the time I’m through here.

Further than that, I don’t even have to say these individuals are wrong or even try to start an argument. Expressing an opinion or asking a question is enough to get the name-calling, booing, and hate flowing. I ask a legitimate question in an attempt to understand what another community I’m not part of is going through, and what I get from other white people (who also are outside the community I’m trying to understand) is, you’re a racist because you bothered asking and don’t just automatically assume they’re right on everything. Sometimes those from the community jump on the bandwagon with the white individual who already started the name calling, mockery, and disrespect. Those who do often complain that I can’t understand because I don’t know what I don’t know, but they do. The complaints boil down to, you’re a racist, and I know that because I’m a minority, you’re not, and as such, I have special knowledge you don’t. (This isn’t to say that no one outside the minority community is racist and rightfully called out on it, of course. There are definitely instances where an individual from a minority rightfully calls out racist behavior as it is. But these days, simply asking a question is racist, and the individuals I’m referring to above are the sorts who propose to judge the motive behind the question even when none is actually given. How they can do that is beyond me. I mean, I know I don’t have that particular superpower, but apparently some special human beings of other colors do, so…)

Now, granted that’s not everyone’s attitude. But the vast majority of people making a lot of noise and fuss and pulling the race card on things that have become increasingly more ridiculous think this way. Those of you who are non-Christians probably don’t see the big deal. But while I do hope that this article will be a good learning point for you guys in seeing why the Biblical worldview will always take the strongest possible stance against an attitude of racism possible, my goal in writing this article is mainly to address my fellow Christians: liberal or conservative.

A Wake-Up Call

Guys, we need to wake up and start getting back to the God of the Bible and what He has to say. No two ways about it… If we don’t do this, we are going to keep losing our children to a socialist/communist agenda that seeks to destroy any belief in God, seeks to destroy God’s people, and seeks to destroy liberty. That’s why this is important.

Right now, the church is not meeting the culture with a strong Biblical stance on the issue of racism. We’re instead pandering to the culture, refusing to talk about it at all, or are wishy-washy on it. If we do any of those three things in response to this, we’re giving the culture the opportunity to inform our children’s viewpoints on because we have not first shown them the Biblical point of view. We will lose them to a culture that says racism is wrong with zero legitimate reason, from a non-Biblical, evolutionary point of view, to say that it is.

Nothing in evolution requires that we think that somehow we are the only race that has escaped the evolutionary hierarchy. Saying otherwise is to contradict everything in the theory, as it has changed remarkably little since Darwin and his immediate predecessors first developed it. If we want our children to believe in something that has no inherent reason to respect the sanctity of human life, no foundation for any sound or consistent morals beyond whatever society or the individual chooses for themselves, and zero reason for any concern for those around them… If we want our children to walk away from God because we have given them a view of Him that is so utterly decrepit and unholy, so utterly without answers to the issues they’re seeing around them every day, then going silent on the issues around us and on what God has to say is the way to do it.

I don’t yet have kids to train up in the way they should go. But someday I will, and I don’t want to live in a country where I have no freedom to do what God has called me to do without fear. America’s greatest strength has been in its promise of liberty and the protection of rights for everyone. Granted, there have been times where we as a nation didn’t uphold those ideals like we should have. But we’ve always had groups who stood up and fought rightfully through our legal system, peaceful protests, and petitions to make a difference and to stop injustice. That’s an amazing thing, but if we start in the home by teaching our children a Christ-centered viewpoint that respects even those who as individuals have proven undeserving of it, that loves even the most unloveable, and that speaks truth even when it is unpopular to do so, we’re going to start seeing a return to the values in our Constitution. We’re going to lose fewer of our children to the world’s lies, and we’re going to raise kids who are able to change the world around them for the better because they have a God-sized vision for change and for reaching the hearts of men for their King.

While I don’t have kids to raise yet, if I want to be able to raise them safely and in freedom without the fear of the government taking them away, refusing me the right to raise them in the fear and admonish of the Lord, or trying to brainwash them while silencing me as the parent, I need to be doing my part to defend those liberties now before it’s too late. Right now, I might not have kids, but I do have a voice, and I can use it to try to reach even just one or two others who can catch the vision for a church and, yes, a country, that is once again God-centered, God-focused, and multi-generational in its view toward the future. It isn’t too late for us, especially for those of us in my age range who don’t have kids yet and don’t have to lose them to a world that will destroy them and everything truly morally good and upright in them.

So let’s start addressing the issues in today’s culture from a Biblical worldview. Today, I’m starting with the one most in our faces right now: race and the issue of racism.

The Question for Consideration

Why is racism and racist behavior or thinking wrong? Liberals and Democrats would scream from the tops of mountains and to anyone who will listen that anyone who dares have such a mentality is one of the most disgusting, wicked human beings out there. Ironic considering their worldview often gives no yardstick by which to measure morality and thus offers them no leg to stand on to say anyone is more wicked than another for any given behavior. But I’ll save that for later on in this discussion.

The fact of the matter is that right now we’re hearing society’s loudest voices shout down anyone who dissents against their view on racism and we’re hearing countless voices, conservative or liberal, denouncing racists and racism behavior. But if we’re going to do that, shouldn’t we know what we’re standing against and why we’re doing so? As Christians, it’s imperative that we exercise discernment and understand why we do (or do not) agree with a given philosophy or belief so that we can ensure every word, deed, and thought is in line with Scripture.

So let’s take a look at why the biggest supporters of anti-racism will be those who are true believers following God’s Word and living in the Spirit. Let’s also examine where this concept of racism really sprang up from, why it did so, and why you must have a Christian worldview (at the very least on this issue) to have any validity in saying racism is wrong.

A Question of Morals

There are many places I could start on this discussion, but I’m going to start with morals because I don’t believe any discussion on this topic can be meaningful if your morals are not grounded firmly in truth. The issue of racism is a moral one, whether we want to admit it or not. I think most of us can agree that it isn’t political, even if others want to say it is. If it were simply political, there would be no outcry on the grounds of certain behaviors being right or wrong.

But here’s the problem that you run into, then, if you recognize it’s a moral issue but you refuse to acknowledge God or His Word as the solution. Many people will say something along the lines of “we don’t need God to know the difference between right and wrong.” Now, I’m not trying to make light of these people or mock them, but that is the statement of a fool according to the Bible (Psalm 14:1) as a fool doesn’t acknowledge that there is a God or a need for one. But why is it so important that there is in fact a God, and specifically a God like the Bible presents, if we are to have any basis for morality?

Change as the Reason

The answer? Change. Human beings are subject to change. Once upon a time, the Germans (or at least large groups of them) thought it was fine, maybe even morally praise-worthy, to round up and slaughter Jews, Blacks, and other minorities like animals simply because they were “less evolved” and “not a part of the superior race”, which was exactly how Hitler justified what he was doing. Once upon a time, rich white plantation owners justified one of the most horrific forms of abuse known to man in the form of American slavery, and while no one up North likes to admit it, most people North and South didn’t care much one way or another.

No one but a select group of very loud abolitionists, who rightfully found the practice reprehensible, spoke up against it. While some might have personally believed it wasn’t a good thing, most simply ignored it if it didn’t affect them or viewed it as necessary. And few, if any, on either side even viewed the Africans (or other slaves from say Ireland who were under the guise of “indentured servants” and were treated as poorly or worse than the Africans due to how cheap they could be acquired) as human beings or people. Thus, they came up with insane compromises like treating them as 2/3rds of a person under the law in some cases and like property in others.

Once upon a time, Darwin stated that the natives of South America were savages and hardly human if they were in fact human at all, and those who followed in his footsteps on the matter of evolution agreed. They made inherent dehumanization of those who didn’t act or look like them a major part of their theory. Darwin himself justified this by saying that it was simply one more example of evolution in action, just as the Galapagos finches were to his mind examples of evolution in practice. Therefore, he said, those savages (referring to the non-white tribal people of South America and later to African slaves) were closer to being apes than he and those from England or Western Civilization were, and he saw no problem with treating them as less than human.

These examples are only a few of the instances where humans set their own moral standards of right and wrong without God and His Word in the picture. But what happened? Do we still believe those mindsets are acceptable? No! We don’t. Even though we still have evolution around, and even though there is absolutely nothing in the evolutionary theory or the science supposedly behind it that would give us reason to say that we shouldn’t behave just like the other animals around us (since we are, after all, simply more evolved animals ourselves), we still view these actions and thoughts as disgusting. Liberals and conservatives alike would decry these behaviors. Few think they’re acceptable in any way. Why? Because society changed its mind. We don’t live in a society that thinks this is still okay.

The Breakdown of Morality

Okay, but clearly we still can have some moral compass without God, right? Wrong. Anyone who is going to argue that one thing is wrong and another is right must argue it with a rooted belief in the God of the Bible. They won’t admit it, of course, and they make their own arguments logically fallacious because they don’t believe in God, but evolution or any viewpoint with an unchanging, perfectly holy God must then be unable to declare anything moral or immoral. There is no set standard because we as humans, who change our minds constantly, are the only ones who can decree what is right and wrong. If there’s no yardstick to measure by, then if society decided tomorrow that it’s acceptable to kill every, let’s say, white liberal man in a given country, we can’t say it’s wrong. Because society said it was fine.

You also can’t say that Hitler was wrong because the majority of his society agreed with him. Had he won, most of Europe wouldn’t have found anything wrong with what he did either because the victors write the history books and put their own spin on it. That area of Europe would’ve adopted the same mentality because with no moral code higher than ourselves, why would we declare it wrong so long as everyone around us says it’s right?

If I could ask for a show of hands right now for who feels comfortable with that conclusion, I doubt many would raise their hands. But here’s the problem. If you don’t believe in an unchangeable, holy God who gave us His moral code, which can never change, then you’re left with only one option: humans must decide what is moral good or moral evil on their own. Whether society does it or you say a single individual does so for themselves, there will be problems with either.

Deep down, most of us can admit there are just certain things like murder, hating your fellow man on basis of skin color, or taking/destroying another’s property that are simply wrong. But why? Have we stopped to ask that question? For someone with a Christian worldview, the answer is easy. God says murder, hatred (murder in the heart, according to Scripture), and destruction or theft are all sin. He punishes them, and they are clearly labeled as outpourings of a sin nature, which goes beyond a simple issue with a specific sin and is ultimately what will condemn us without Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross and His blood applied to us. But if you don’t believe that God exists, what is your basis? Society said so? You said so? Last I checked, we’ve already proven both are subject to change and that both can be wrong, so how can you condemn someone who thinks differently than you if that’s the case? What if they’re right and you’re wrong?

In the end, then, all things must be named acceptable so long as either a) they are acceptable to a large enough crowd of people or b) the individual has decided it’s right for them. Neither is a good solution. Both lead to all kinds of issues, and inevitably, as we’re seeing all over in America today with the looting, rioting, senseless killings, and outcries for a false justice to be meted out on an entire group of people who in most cases neither descended from slavers nor have done anything truly racist or wrong. Both options that leave God out of the equation result in a breakdown of morality.

No True Morality Without A Holy God

There are no two ways about it. You can split hairs all you want. But if you are going to be logical about it, you can’t say everyone is human and deserves respect as such (that’s a Biblical concept, not a progressive, evolutionary idea), you can’t say that we should do unto others as we want done unto us (that’s also a Biblical concept, not a progressive evolutionary idea), and you can’t say in any honest way that we can discern right from wrong (because that’s a Bible idea and a conscience thing, which animals and evolution have no room for, and it’s not a progressive evolutionary idea).

If you’re going to be logical and honest about where a viewpoint without God leads in the matter of morality, you must then say that the only reason you think something is right or wrong is because it isn’t to your taste. It isn’t truly right or wrong because there’s no such thing if you aren’t reasoning from a measuring stick that doesn’t change. Right and wrong are determined by society or by the individual, so the fact that you don’t find it tasteful doesn’t mean they’re morally wrong for doing it. Your opinion is no more valid than someone else’s if there’s nothing behind it except your own ideas of what’s right and wrong. Those ideas are all in your head. They’re as made up by you as a fictional world is by a writer. Unless there is a God who holds us to an unchangeable standard and is Himself above all else with the authority to declare what is right and what is not, unless there is a holy, just God who will never pass judgment in error or change the standards up, you cannot have morality.

The Mindset that Justified Slavery

Slavery of the sort American plantation owners and British upper class citizens practiced has been around for nearly as long as mankind has existed. You can go all the way back to the Romans, Ancient Egypt, and certainly Ancient Babylon or Assyria even further back than the first two. You’ll find it, and it didn’t discriminate in color when it came to the wickedness of treating another human being like property. Many times, these slaves were “spoils” of war.

But by the time history gets around to Colonial America and Britain previous to their anti-slavery policies, we see something start to happen that wasn’t as common if it was found at all. British and American traders began to take slaves on their forays into Africa, South America, and the Indies. They had other slaves, of course, in the case of convicts from Britain who were sent to work on penal colonies or Irish political prisoners in other cases. But there were rules governing how these individuals were to be treated, even if they were mistreated in many situations, and they weren’t viewed as non-humans. So why is it, then, that Africans and natives of places like South America or the Indies weren’t afforded the same privilege?

The answer lies in the mindsets springing up around the world and in the combination of both the old world view of the native inhabitants of the new world and the emergence of evolution via Charles Darwin and those who followed in his footsteps. Now, I know full well that those who support evolution (meaning most liberals and even some Christians) will say, we don’t follow Darwin, and we know better because science has advanced. But Darwin was not simply a product of the prevailing discriminatory attitude Western civilization had for anything that wasn’t Western. He certainly had that mentality, and it’s obvious in his writings, but what is equally transparent is that Darwin was happy to state that his views on evolution informed his thinking on treatment of and status of the natives and Africans he encountered.

He not only viewed the natives as savages, but he also states many times things such as “one could hardly believe they were human” or that they were “far inferior to the English colonists”. He viewed them as “primitive beings” and didn’t see them as human. He had zero issue with slavery, not because it was widely accepted at the time, but because he believed natural selection dictated that it was fine and that the eventual extermination of the “savages” was inevitable due to natural selection. Darwin even compared the natives of South America that the crew took back to England and their transformation into “complete and voluntary Europeans” as well as many other situations he observed in the native lifestyles to the natural selection he found in the finches on the Galapagos islands, which he viewed as evidence for evolution.

Using the Mindset and Philosophy to Justify Unspeakable Acts

So then, when his teachings are observed, it is clear that, at the very least, Darwin applied evolutionary principles to the human race and used it to create a distinction between a European and a native in South America. While it should be admitted that Darwin himself, on a humanitarian scale, didn’t agree with the heinous mistreatment of the natives despite his belief that they were, at the least, not the superior race, his beliefs and the logical conclusion of them were adopted by many who followed after.

This led to disastrous events and unspeakable mistreatment levied at those “less superior” races. Most notably, history gives us Hitler, Stalin, and the American version of slavery. Darwin would likely have been horrified by Hitler and Stalin. What he would’ve thought of slavery in America is less certain since he himself did not find any moral issues with it during his time, and it was no less hideous then. But there is no escaping the facts. The European mindset of Western superiority blended with evolutionary philosophies as Darwin and others developed it set the stage for justification of some of the worst acts known to man. And for those who are willing to be honest and consistent in their beliefs, we still see it causing issues today.

The Liberal Arguments Against Racism: Substantiated or Not?

From a liberal perspective with God out of the equation, the arguments, as I briefly noted earlier, run something along the lines of saying all of us are human regardless of skin color, no one is superior to another on that grounds, and we should all treat each other the way we want to be treated. Further, some would say, we don’t need God to know right from wrong, and we don’t hold to Darwin’s teachings on this matter because science has advanced enough to let us know that was wrong. Some would say that science has proven Darwin’s teachings and that it isn’t a religion or faith-based thing but is instead that Darwin discovered a scientific fact and was later proven right. In some cases, I’ve heard from liberal acquaintances and friends that whether we have any purpose on the Earth or not, and whether we were created by God or evolved for no particular reason at all, should have no bearing on how we treat each other.

These are real responses I’ve gotten when I’ve asked liberals why they think racism is so bad when God is taken out of the equation. I asked because I didn’t want to get the answers wrong, misrepresent their viewpoints, or unfairly accuse them of saying things they wouldn’t ever say. (And… Well, I asked because I was genuinely curious too. Never have heard a good answer–or really any answer at all–backed by sound logic from a liberal who believes in evolution wholeheartedly, and I was curious if anyone had some answers. We seem to take it for granted that this issue is wrong, but while I have reasons why it’s wrong from my perspective, I didn’t have any idea what a non-Christian liberal thought. Now I do!)

So, let’s break this down. I agree with them on the first three points. Let’s start with those since it’s a point of common ground. While they are correct to state we’re all human regardless of color, that no one is superior to another based on skin color, and that we should treat others as we want to be treated, what is the reasoning point for this? I’ve heard zero good explanations of the grounds for these statements from any liberal who removes God from the equation. This is entirely due to the discussion on morality I gave above. Evolution doesn’t give them any ground to claim this because evolution says, hey, we’re all random chance, products of natural selection, and more evolved animals. A viewpoint like that results in the following logical conclusions:

  1. Nothing actually matters that much because it’s all random chance and there’s not much to live for except, depending on who you ask, furthering the survival of the human race. But what’s the purpose for it? Why bother if there’s no reward or benefit in it? I’m going to die eventually, and so will my children. So why not live in whatever way most pleases me? I have zero reason, from this viewpoint, to care what happens to other people around me unless I happen to have some sort of emotional concern for them because they’re friends or family. We see exactly this attitude in those who are stealing, looting, rioting, and burning the homes or businesses of individuals who haven’t done anything wrong. It is entirely a me-focused mentality, and why shouldn’t it be if it benefits your survival and your needs? At best, you might be concerned about the survival of those around you simply because they’re central to your preferred existence or because you have feelings of affection toward them. But any altruism that doesn’t in some way benefit us? Evolution gives us no reason for that. It’s a good thing from a Christian point of view to serve others and to be self-sacrificing. From an evolutionary perspective, who cares? We’re random chance and animals anyway, so why bother to act like we’re not?
  2. We’re all animals. Animals don’t care who gets hurt when they do something. One monkey who dukes it out with another over a female doesn’t care if it kills the other male who lost. One group of lions who fight another over turf doesn’t feel remorse over killing their own kind. So if we’re no different than animals, what do we care if we kill someone else? There’s nothing special about us, no inherent aspect that goes beyond simple matter or neurons firing in the brain. Just like animals, we simply live and work off emotions, the drive to survive, and the drive to reproduce. We don’t have a soul or something called a conscience because animals don’t possess it, and if we’re animals, neither can we. We’re capable of more thought than a dog, say, but at the base of it all, we’re still just highly-advanced animals. Therefore, it doesn’t matter if what I do hurts someone else. I’m just acting on my instinct to survive and on my baser instincts to fight when challenged. If I happen to have the pack mentality some animals possess, great. If not and I’m more of a loner type of animal that will attack anything that comes onto its territory, eh, who cares? Whichever of us is superior will win, and natural selection will have strengthened the winner’s group by weeding out the losing party, who was too weak to make it anyway.
  3. Nothing can actually be morally right or wrong if you’re going to be both logical and honest. We went over this one before in detail, but if there’s no standard that’s unchanging outside of societal pressures or our own changeable, fickle natures, then we can’t have morality. So an honest evolutionist would also have to say that, while some things might not be their preference, it’s all okay because, really, it’s all about what you or what your society wants to do.
  4. I have a right to be prideful and think I’m better than everyone not like me if I’m the superior race. After all, survival of the fittest dictates that whoever is best equipped for survival survives. They weren’t fit for survival or aren’t currently and are in the process of dying out, so it’s only natural that my expansion and my upward movement on the evolutionary totem pole may result in their diminishment or perhaps even their complete destruction, and there’s nothing wrong with that because it’s just natural selection/survival of the fittest at work. I haven’t done anything wrong in helping it along either because that’s just naturally what the superior race does as it expands in its quest to survive. (This, by the way, is exactly what Darwin believed and found integral to his evolutionary theories. His contemporaries Herbert Spencer and Thomas Malthus saw this in his theories, though Darwin himself spoke of it rarely and mostly contained it to his personal writings, and they ran with it. From this viewpoint came the idea of laizzes-faire capitalism, or in layman’s terms, unrestrained capitalism. Spencer applied survival of the fittest to economics, and unrestrained capitalism during the Industrial Revolution was the result, much to our detriment in America today. This “social Darwinism” was used down through history to justify many horrific acts of racism, imperialism, eugenics, and social inequality. —History.com)

There are, of course, other issues that evolution can lead to in terms of thinking. But these are the ones relevant to our discussion here. You can see that, if you think through what evolution actually says and apply it logically with no rose-tinted glasses and without any inconsistencies or conflict of your beliefs, you must come to a conclusion that is at best untenable to most but, in reality, is repugnant and horrifying to nearly everyone. To those who object that evolution is science, not faith, and doesn’t have anything to do with what religion you choose to hold… Believing evolution is true is as much a belief as believing that you are a good person or believing that one person would be a better president than another. Furthermore, it is in fact as much faith-based as believing there is a God and has fewer answers with more logical holes and fallacies than any belief in a Creator. We all hold beliefs, and evolution is one of them that people hold by faith since, though we teach it as fact in school, the very scientists who once thought it true have admitted they have no idea how it happened, have been unable to repeat it or observe it–something absolutely necessary to make something scientific fact per the scientific method–and do not know how they might prove it to be true beyond the simple belief that it must be true because how else could we come to be? If that is not enough, their “scientific fact” has ignored the clear display of intelligent, intentional design in everything from the plants around us to the very eyes we use to see those plants. Intelligent, intentional design requires an intelligent origin! We would never look at a car and say, Wow, how amazing that particles randomly smashed together to create parts, which randomly organized and evolved into this vehicle that I am going to drive. That’s ridiculous. We know when we look at that car that someone had to create the design that others would then build. How much more inane is it to say that the incredible work we see in the way our own bodies function, in the way the world around us functions so well together in nature, is somehow the result of random chance? We have brains, and those brains, if they weren’t taught to believe the philosophies we’ve been fed since birth, if they weren’t insistent on denying any Creator’s existence, would never reasonably come to the conclusion that we’re no different than animals, that the world is random chance, and that such intentional design could randomly evolve somehow in a way we can’t even replicate.

To be clear, only the truly crazed individual or someone with no love on any level within their darkened heart could say the things I have just laid out. I’ve not yet met an evolutionist or a liberal evolutionist who was willing to say these things because they’re too inpalatable and disgusting to beings with a moral compass in the form of a God-given conscience. No matter how insistently they refuse to acknowledge God or His law, they still use it in determining how they should interact with their fellow man even when their worldview gives them zero reason to turn to love, kindness, and respect for those not like them. Unfortunately, that crazed individual or person without any love at all in their hearts would be more honest about the conclusions they must draw from their evolutionary belief than any other evolutionistic liberal who chooses not to acknowledge these things and instead reasons from a Christian moral system while denying the very God who gave it. Is it any wonder our world is so messed up on moral good and evil?

The Conclusion on the Matter? Substantiated or Not?

So then, we see that while liberals are correct to argue that we are all human regardless of color, that we should do unto other as we want done to us, and that we shouldn’t hate someone based on something like skin color, they have rendered their own argument invalid and unsupported by removing God from the equation. Another similarly godless individual might well look at them and say, “That’s nice and all, but you have yet to give me anything that makes your opinion better than mine. So I think genocide is okay, and that’s what I’m sticking to.” Another similarly godless person would argue just as validly that racism, hatred, murder, and mass slaughter is all perfectly acceptable because a liberal arguing these things from their worldview invalidates their own message, even if it is in fact the right one. That liberal has nothing to point to that demands respect for human life, the sanctity of that life, or the importance of behaving with love towards those different than us. They can shout about it all they want, but they don’t have any valid reason not to look at the individual who thinks killing others unlike them is okay and say: “That’s not my preference, but you do you, I guess.” They can’t argue from any moral ground because their viewpoint removes morals entirely from the equation, so if they’re going to try to reason from a moral perspective, they have to use God’s Word and His law to reason against the wrong belief that killing an entire people group (or anyone, for that matter) is okay.

In response to their last two points, I point back to our discussions on morality and to what modern evolution still has to say about the human race. The fact that we call someone of a different color than us another race in the first place is evidence to just how deep evolution’s roots go in the issue of racism. Had science truly developed, we wouldn’t use that terminology. Even though science may clearly show that our DNA doesn’t differ by much at all (certainly not enough to make us separate species), we’re still wrongly dividing people up by race and using Darwin’s system even as we argue that racism is bad. If science has developed so much, we would see evolutionists firmly disputing Darwin’s claims on the whole because they were motivated and rooted in racist opinions and even those views which are not tainted by it are questionable as we cannot repeat them, and we would not call the issue of hating those of other colors in our population racism at all. Rather, we would more accurately call it discrimination (which to be fair many do, but they use it interchangeably with racism). We would call it that because we would recognize what so many liberals don’t seem to: hatred of another on the basis of color or any other factor is not restricted to only those in one group or “race”. If it were, you wouldn’t see BLM reps calling for whites who haven’t participated in active racism, haven’t owned slaves, and (in so many cases) have only immigrant ancestors who never once owned a slave and were often equally discriminated against in the North.

So, on all points, their argument’s basis renders itself logically and reasonably invalid. Does this mean we should discard everything they’re saying? No! So let’s take a look at that next.

Racism in light of the Bible

When it comes to a proper view of the wickedness of racism, the Christian man or woman rooted in God and His Word can confidently say it is wrong, and when asked why, we can give a logical, sound reason for it! Granted, liberals and others who refuse to acknowledge the existence of an all powerful, entirely holy, unchanging God will say this isn’t valid. But as we’ve already proven, they’re going to take a stance on it that, while lighter than the one I believe we as Christians should be taking, is still entirely rooted in Scripture whilst they deny the God that makes their argument at all valid or accurate. Let’s review why we can make a valid, logical, and substantiated claim that racism is wicked from a Biblical worldview.

  1. The Bible doesn’t recognize any “race” but the human race. It has plenty of nations and tribes or peoples, as they’re sometimes called, but race does not enter the equation. Anyone who says that a person who looks different them on the grounds of skin color or appearance is a different race? They’re patently wrong and ignoring the fact that God didn’t make more than one human race. He made Adam and Eve as the father and mother of the human race, and we all descend from them. (Genesis 3:20)
  2. Christ was inclusive of people of all colors, tribes, and nations. In Jewish society, outsiders (or Gentiles) were looked down on. People like the Ethiopian eunuch that Philip spoke to and baptized in Acts would be considered lesser than a Jew. Worse than that, anyone who was of mixed Jewish and Gentile heritage was hated or despised more than a Gentile would be. And yet, Jesus came to die for all peoples, tribes, and nations. He didn’t die for just Jews, and He makes that clear time and again, even though the Jews didn’t get it. More than that, lest anyone miss that point, Paul and other men inspired by the Holy Spirit wrote to the Jews and Gentiles both and reminded them that Christ died for men of all types, not just for their group and no other. (Acts 10:34-43; Acts 15:7-11; John 4:1-41; Romans 3:21-30)
  3. The Bible is very clear we should do unto others as we would have done unto us (the same argument liberals use while denying that it was God that said it!), and so if we would not want our friends in another color group to attack us, enslave us, hurt us, or deride us simply because of what color we are, then we’d better not do it to them. (Matthew 7:12)

These are all very good reasons why we shouldn’t have a mentality that divides people into other races just because they’re not the same color as we are. But there are some even bigger problems with a Christian who endorses anything like the American or British versions of slavery or who has a racist mentality. So here are some clear sins we’d be committing if we did approve of racism.

  1. The sin of hatred. Jesus calls hatred committing murder in our hearts. It is the inward attitude or heart problem that may, in some cases lead to committing the physical act of murder, and the Bible takes it very, very seriously. A Christian who commits this act of inward murder in the mind and heart is a Christian who is not obeying the command to love those around them. So in hating someone else because of skin color, we would then be committing sins of both commission (hating when we’re told not to) and omission (failing to love when we’re told to). (Matthew 5:21-26)
  2. The sin of pride. Proverbs has all kinds of things to say about this, all of them negative! Most notably are the verses where God says he resists the proud and gives grace to the humble or the point in Proverbs where Solomon through God’s inspiration writes that there is more hope of a fool than a man wise in his own eyes. God hates pride. Pride was the sin that ultimately got Satan kicked out of heaven along with all the angels who joined him in it. It’s deadly, it’s destructive, and it’s ugly. In the case of discriminating against another because of their skin color, pride yet again rears its ugly head as the individual doing the discrimination is literally saying, I’m better than you because I’m part of this group and not your group. It says, you don’t deserve to be treated with respect and dignity or with love and kindness because you are beneath me. What a wicked attitude to have! (Psalm 10:4; Psalm 138:6; Proverbs 11:12; Proverbs 8:13; Proverbs 16:5; Proverbs 26:12; Isaiah 14: 12-15; Daniel 5:20; Obadiah 1:3; Mark 7:20-23; Luke 14:11)
  3. The sin of blasphemy. When I first saw this connected to racism, I admit I was a bit confused. How is being racist blasphemous against God? Blasphemy is when we talk about God in an irreverent or sacrilegious way. When we look at another human being in disgust, we are in essence telling the world and God that He got it wrong. We’re maligning His character, if you want to think of it that way, because we’re looking at the amazing creativity God had in creating us with so many variations and beautiful differences in appearance and saying, God, if I were you, I wouldn’t have done it like this. We’re now turning our pride on God and saying, I could’ve done it better than You did, so let me tell you how it should’ve been done. What a dangerous place to be! Even if we don’t recognize it as such, looking at another of God’s creatures with such contempt and disgust solely on the grounds of color and appearance they were given from birth, which they had no control over, requires us then to make a statement on God’s design. Because if the human beings we hate for being black, white, red, yellow, or any other skin color under the sun had no control over how they were made, then our statement of poor design can only reflect upon the designer, not the work of art. God’s design was always for us to dwell in peace with Him and our fellow men. Sin has broken that fellowship and peace between all parties, but we are still called to live peaceably with all men as much as lies within us (Romans 12:18). While no specific Bible verse is going to tell you it’s blasphemy, an attitude that says God got it wrong denies the very nature of God, His plan, and His Word, all of which is blasphemy for a believer to say.

So we see that there are three very insidious sins involved in the actions and attitudes of a person who is truly racist. Those attitudes of hate, blasphemy, and pride are all sins, and they should be addressed as such.

Conclusion

When next you’re speaking to a non-Christian on the topic of racism, I challenge you to present it from this light. This is an opportunity to take a stand against sin. In this case, while the world may hate us and shame us for not condoning more sin in response to individuals’ sins already committed (by which I refer to the growing push to punish/demand restitution from all whites across the board, even if they genuinely have done nothing wrong, under the belief that they are at fault for everything wrong with the Black community as a result of their ancestry), we still have an incredible opportunity to stand up and speak out. We can stop applauding the wrong philosophies of the world around us while still affirming that God has called His people to love those around us, even if they hate us and spitefully abuse us. We can stop applauding an attitude of hatred on both sides while still affirming that racism is wicked and wrong.

But more than that, this provides an amazing opportunity to challenge an unbeliever to reconsider their views on God. As we’ve seen, the belief in evolution has contributed in so many ways to an worldview that logically would promote racism and offers those who already desire to engage in that heinous attitude an excuse to do so without guilt. So this is an opportunity to both find common ground and also challenge them. You can agree with them that racism is wrong, but then ask them why they think so. Ask them what the reasoning behind this is. Listen to them. Be thoughtful, respectful, and considerate. But push for answers. It’s always okay to keep asking “But why” or to say “But if you believe this, then why don’t you believe this is/isn’t okay?”.

These questions will probably make people mad, even if you ask it as kindly and gently as possible. I’ve been told many times that reasoning in this way and asking the question “Why is racism wrong” after having done so makes my question invalid and undeserving of an answer. But despite what the culture might wish to say or insist on, they’re valid questions to ask and do deserve an answer. The culture around us demands an answer of us. Why can we not also ask an answer of them, especially when we do it far more kindly and gently than they often have? There is a double standard, and if we play by their rules instead of using the brains and the tools God gave us to combat philosophies that are stealing our young people and deceiving those around us, we’re going to lose. Stop playing by their rules! They don’t want to be held to their own standards of reasoning, but they should be, and it’s time we started to do so respectfully but firmly.

In many cases, these questions can open the door for you to witness to people who otherwise never would’ve considered listening to a Christian, as well. If you’re able to have an honest conversation, help them to understand you aren’t approaching them in pride (if that’s not true, it’s better you don’t approach them at all), and point out the problems with their perspectives, the chances are much greater that they’ll be open to hearing you out, and in the process, God can use you to work on their hearts. He can’t do that if you’re rude, combative, and entirely un-Christian even as you may be factually correct.

Most importantly, pray. Pray for those that God gives you chances to be a light to. Ask Him to work on their hearts. It is not for us to save, only to take every opportunity God brings to us to be the salt and the light to a dying, lost world. Let’s do that by taking the truth to that dying, lost world in love and refusing to let go of them. They may scream, they may rage, they may call us names or refuse to listen. Perhaps when you ask if you can pray for them, they will say no. Pray anyway. Ultimately, while we need to understand the truths I’ve gone through above, and we need to have an answer to give for the hope that is in us and the things that we believe, prayer is our greatest weapon. We can speak the truth in love until we’re blue in the face, but if God does not change the hearts to receive that truth, then we will still see no fruit. So while we’re doing the active part God has called us to play, let’s not forget that prayer is also an action and must not be ignored.

I hope this has been an encouragement and, perhaps even, an eye-opener for those of you who are believers. We do have answers for the lost, dying world around us. We do have answers for our young people if we will only live the way we are asking them to. If we will address our culture’s false claims and Satan’s lures on our young people with Scripture and guide them to see the beauty in a life surrendered totally to God, we are going to lose far fewer of them to the temporary pleasures of sin and the world’s system.

Furthermore, at times, those around us who are condemning us so roundly for what we believe are actually in agreement with us without even knowing it. This includes both children who have already begun to reject our message in favor of what they are hearing at school, from peers, or from society as well as others around us who are part of that society and culture. We can find incredible opportunities to use that common ground, where it may exist, as a way to be the light God may use to open their eyes. This is not to say we should conform to the world or create common ground by compromising on Scripture. That is unacceptable if we are to live a set-apart life, holy in the eyes of God. However, if that agreement or common ground already exists beforehand when you are simply following what Scripture says, take advantage of that to show them the why behind what they’re claiming to believe. Most probably have no idea that the moral values they hold have Scriptural backing but no backing in the socially acceptable, evolutionary viewpoint of today’s society.

But even if we’re not able to stand on any common ground in our witnessing to individuals around us, we still can rest secure in the fact that we have a sovereign God who is still on the throne and that our God has not asked us to do the impossible but only to go to those around us with the hand of love extended and the truth on our lips. It’s time for us to reclaim the Church for God, to see a revival like we see in history’s pages happen today, and to stop letting the culture inform us on how we can be Christians in name without offending anyone by being Christians in reality. We please God, not man. He has given us the answers to a morally bankrupt society if we will only stand on those truths, exemplify them in our lives, and pass them along to the next generation. God help us all, in whatever stage of life we may be in, to do our part in achieving that God-focused goal in our life.

The War of Independence and the Civil War: Parallels

Ariel Paiement

Introduction

The topic of the American Revolution, the Civil War, and rebellion have all become rapidly circulated issues in today’s culture with everything going on. People would like us to believe that the American Revolution and the Civil War are miles apart, that rebellion is a good thing, and that the only reason the Civil War happened was because slavery. But are any these things true? That’s what we’re going to explore today as we dive deep into history and take a look at the facts on both the major wars fought on our soil, the parallels between the two, and the issues surrounding both.

The Matter of Jurisdiction and Rebellion

Before we can get into the parallels between the two wars and the issues pointed out in the introduction, we have to go over the topic of jurisdiction and authority and define rebellion. Too many Americans (and people in general) don’t understand this, but if you don’t understand these issues, then you can’t really understand anything that’s going to follow in this discussion, nor are you fully able to comprehend the intent of the Founding Fathers or our Constitution.

Hence, we see a breakdown of American ideals and society, and we see an increase in the numbers of people who want to liken seizure of city blocks by a mob to the American Revolution. We hear more and more comparisons of riots to our country’s founding or to the Civil War, and while there may be some argument for this on the grounds of the second war in that we haven’t in all the time that has passed managed to improve our attitudes since it occurred, the argument for the first is baseless due to these principles.

So what is jurisdiction? Jurisdiction is the realm of authority afforded to each sphere of life. The spheres of life are family, government, and church. (I know many non-Christians would argue me on this point, but I can get into why the Christian viewpoint is the one that we must reason from on matters of morality–which rebellion is–in order to have any validity at some other point. This is not the point or the forum for it.) Within those spheres of life, certain realms of authority have been given by the Creator, who is above all earthly authorities.

For example, the government has no authority to regulate how you teach or raise your children (with the exception of certain scenarios such as clear abuse of a child, which requires a higher authority to step in and help). They overstep these bounds all the time in modern day society, but the Bible is clear that within the home, it is the responsibility of the parents to teach, raise, and train children in the way they should go. They are wards of the parents, not the states.

Likewise, the church has no authority to tell the government to run the country, and the government has no God-given authority to force the church to worship or not worship in a prescribed way. Oh, they can arrest those who choose to worship in a way that goes against state wishes, as they do in China, but they have no authority to tell Christians not to worship God because we answer to a higher authority, that being God, and we are to obey God’s laws rather than man’s if there is a conflict between the two. So while there will be persecution and consequences for doing the right thing, we do it anyway because the highest authority of all, from whom all other authorities derive their power, commands our loyalty.

Why does this matter? Because there are clear dictates to jurisdiction. In many cultures, authority figures have chosen not to bind themselves by their own laws. Western civilization is unique in this regards because there is a contract between us and our rulers that states our rulers must abide by our laws just as much as we must. This gives us recourse when they break their end of the contract. Understanding this is essential if you’re going to understand either the American Revolution or the Civil War. But we’ll get to that in a few.

Western Civilization and the Contract of Authority

As I said earlier, Western civilization is unique because there is a stated contract between our rulers and we the people that they will do A, B, and C in exchange for us doing D, E, and F. That’s the whole basis of our Constitution. It is an agreement by our rulers with us that all of us will abide by the rules, whatever those may be, and that no one is above those laws. When a ruler steps outside of the bounds of authority established in that contract, they are in violation of the agreement and are no longer exercising rightful authority.

In the case of a country without this sort of contract, then whatever the authorities do, with the exception of choosing to try to stamp out God’s church and His worship, is rightful authority as they have given no such promise to their people to abide by any given set of rules. Therefore, though they may do many, many heinous things, any uprising on the part of their people would be, in fact, a rebellion and therefore unacceptable on the part of any Christian who is following the Scripture. This doesn’t mean Christians won’t disobey a law if it requires them to break God’s laws, which are higher than any civil law on Earth, but it does mean they will have no part in fighting a war against the authorities and will accept whatever punishment accompanies their decision to obey God rather than man.

So how are the American Revolution and the Civil War not rebellions? Because of two very important documents and what they said. Let’s start with the document that gave the American Revolution the status of a war of self-defense, not a war of rebellion.

The Magna Carta

The Magna Carta was a document that laid the foundation for the entire system of British law. It was agreed to in June of 1215 and was an agreement between King John of England and the nobles representing the English people, who were at the time revolting, at least in some areas. It established some basic liberties and the agreement that not even the king was above the English law.

This important document along with the individual charters that colonies had with England formed the backbone of the American Revolution. During the years leading up to the American Revolution, the king was ignoring both the Magna Carta and the individual charters established with the colonies. Had the colonists been in England, their rights as English citizens would never have been so blatantly disregarded, and so they wrote letter after letter and sent representatives to plead with the king and Parliament to hold their part of the deal in all cases, not just in the instances where it benefited them.

King George III and Adding Fuel to Fire

Instead of addressing the concerns, which would have kept the peace and kept the colonies as part of Britain, the king and Parliament ignored them. They continued to pick and choose when to follow their own laws, thereby invalidating the contract by which they held authority. Since they wouldn’t honor their own agreement, it became invalid, and the colonies sent the Declaration of Independence. In a nutshell, that declaration was saying, “You won’t follow your own laws, you won’t treat us like citizens, and so we declare that we do not recognize your wrongful authority nor are we going to continue behaving as if we are citizens when you do not view us as such.” Obviously, the language was much prettier when Jefferson wrote it, but the point was the same.

Essentially, as King George III continued to add fuel to the fire, the colonies finally seceded from Britain. We like to think of it as a grand rebellion for freedom, but it wasn’t. We declared our independence with no violence. After doing so, we appointed our own leaders as any new country would and we kicked out the ones who had invalidated their authority. Most of that was still not violent unless soldiers from Britain wouldn’t leave colonists’ homes, in which case the colonists defended themselves. But that was still self-defense, not rebellion, because Britain had invalidated its own authority and jurisdiction.

The war began when Britain decided to treat the colonies as rebels instead of ex-citizens. They attacked the newly formed coalition of colonies, and the forming country defended itself.

The Constitution

This document formed the backbone for the Civil War in more ways than one. The finalized and superior form of law after the Articles of Confederation we first tried failed, this important document regulated what could and could not be done legally in America. We continue to use it today, though more and more lawmakers try to twist it and often get away with doing so. But in the days leading up to the start of the Civil War, this had not yet begun.

Granted, there was major hypocrisy in how we applied the terms of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence’s statement on the matter of liberties for all men. We as a country had the ugly issue of slavery to deal with if we were to address the issue of hypocrisy that had become so ingrained in our nation by the time of the Civil War. Some illogical (and, if the Constitution were fully followed, illegal) compromises were made to deal with the tension between the two segments of the country–North and South–on this issue. But nonetheless, we had the Constitution, and it governed our laws underneath its umbrella.

Secession and the Constitution

How did this come into play during the Civil War? Prior to any shots being physically fired, segments of the South had already chosen to secede if Lincoln were elected. He won the election with not a single Southern state supporting him. While the hot button issue was slavery, it is worth noting that some states had a secessionist attitude over anything they felt stepped on their toes, not just slavery.

North Carolina, in particular, had been an issue for past Presidents even when no violations to the contract (the Constitution) between states. But regardless of the issues they were arguing over, the fact of it is that secession at that point remained an option. The Constitution did not forbid this right to the States, and so, even if their reasons for doing it were to preserve slavery, which they perceived as absolutely necessary to their existence, the South had the right to leave.

This in no way means that they were right for wanting to keep their slaves. That was a dark blot on the promises the Constitution made. It was inexcusable, wicked, and disgusting. It never should’ve happened, and the Founders had planned for it to fade out. When it didn’t, we ended up with a lot of unexpected problems, and sadly, our leaders on both sides didn’t deal with it in a way that was morally correct. Had they done so, they would’ve freed the slaves (indentured servants included in this since most were treated just as badly, sometimes worse, than slaves) and made sure that those individuals went through the process to become citizens like anyone else or were sent back to their countries of origin. Instead, they went to war over it before we even fired a shot in the Civil War, and the South developed a siege mindset long before a true war even erupted.

But, despite the poor decision-making, wrongful behavior on the parts of many individuals, and a sickening practice of enslaving fellow human beings, the States all had the right at that time to leave the Union. Legally, they should have been allowed to go.

Lincoln and Adding Fuel to the Fire

Lincoln’s election, through no fault of his own, added fuel to the fire. If he had stopped at that being the only thing he did to add fuel to the fire, then he would be blameless in this whole affair. Instead, he blatantly stated in his inaugural address that he was treating the newly-seceded states, which were to form the first part of the Confederation, as rebels. They were not, according to our Constitution, rebels. Thus, after Lincoln declared the Union would force them to return to and stay a part of the Union, the seceded states began preparing for war. They organized further militia forces beyond what was normal the individual States to maintain and prepared to be forced to defend their land and their choice to secede. More states joined them and the fledgling country as the months led up to the Civil War and Lincoln continued to throw fuel on the fire.

He refused to meet with any representatives of the new coalition of states, much like King George III had done, because he wouldn’t recognize them as their own country. He utterly refused to acknowledge their right to leave, regardless of the reason, and insisted on treating them as rebels as opposed to a new country trying to work out the issues between themselves and the neighboring country. Then he further added insult to injury by sending supply ships to a Union Fort in the middle of their territory without asking permission to pass through their borders. Had it been any other country or circumstance, this would have been considered unacceptable, and firing on the ship and fort would’ve been acceptable since the ship wasn’t declared or given permission to pass borders. Instead, Lincoln thought it was fine because he viewed them as rebellious states still in the Union, not as another nation. Why shouldn’t he be able to send his ship anywhere he pleased in his country, right?

To be fair, there were miscommunications on both sides in the issue of Fort Sumter, and those misunderstandings led to many of the issues that resulted in the fort being fired on, but Lincoln’s antagonistic, dismissive behaviors led to the boiling point, and the war began.

To be fair, there were miscommunications on both sides in the issue of Fort Sumter, and those misunderstandings led to many of the issues that resulted in the fort being fired on, but Lincoln’s antagonistic, dismissive behaviors led to the boiling point, and the war began.

Similarities between the American Revolution and the Civil War

Some of the similarities should already be readily apparent from our earlier discussion on jurisdiction, authority, and rebellion. But let’s go over them more clearly and state a few additional similarities that I have come across in the research I’ve done on the two wars.

Rebellions?

First off, neither was a rebellion. In fact, I would call both wars of self-defense, even if, in the case of the Civil War, the first shot fired was over a miscommunication. If you look at how both wars were fought, both were fought on the soil of the newly-independent country, predominantly or entirely. Neither of these wars’ defendants were interested in seizing territory from the other side as a policy. They simply wanted to leave quietly and be left alone to govern their own affairs.

Fought on the Defendant’s Soil

Most of the war in the case of the Civil War was fought in border states that had been split in half between North and South or in Southern territory. The Confederate States were utterly destroyed by the war and Lincoln’s determination to overrun them, run roughshod over their choice to leave, and force them to return to the Union. In the end, he succeeded, but he cost both countries enormous losses of life and cost the Confederacy a great deal of the infrastructure they did have. The war only further entrenched the siege mentality the Confederate States had and confirmed their worst fears that they wouldn’t be allowed to leave.

In the case of the American Revolution, it was fought entirely on American soil, and we fought, just as the Southerners did, to defend home and family. While the American Revolution didn’t have the cause of slavery added into the mix to make the war appear “unrighteous” on the part of those who seceded, it and the Civil War are similar in that the war only started when the new countries were threatened or outright attacked by the countries they seceded from.

Given this is the case, the American Revolution would be more accurately termed the American War of Self-Defense, and the Civil War would be more accurately termed the Confederate War of Self-Defense. After all, the American Revolution was not a revolution in the true definition of the word, nor was the Civil War a Civil War because it was between two countries, not one that was split. You can’t have a civil war if the war isn’t between citizens of the same country, and no matter how much Lincoln wanted to ignore the Constitution’s terms, the South had legally left and declared themselves no longer citizens of the Union, so it wasn’t a situation of citizens of the same country fighting.

Struggles Against Wrongful Authority

Since both wars were fought between countries who operated with the Western form of government, which involves contracts that both parties most follow to have authority or to be governed, both the colonies and the Confederate States were fighting against wrongful authority. As mentioned earlier, the colonies were fighting against a government that was not following its own contract and laws. The Confederate States ended up fighting a war against the Union because its leader and government chose not to honor their contract, which allowed the Confederate States to do what they had done and secede. In both cases, the governments that had previously governed them violated their contracts and therefore were exercising wrongful authority when the wars erupted. This directly leads back to the reasons why neither were, in fact, in rebellion.

Conclusion

To round out this history discussion, let’s go back to the beginning. The issues I proposed as questions were that the American Revolution and the Civil War are miles apart, that rebellion is a good thing, and that the Civil War was about slavery alone or predominantly. So looking over what we discussed, here are the facts.

  1. The American Revolution and the Civil War were in fact vastly similar. Both were wars of defense against wrongful authority, and both were fought in a mainly defensive manner, supporting their claims that they just wanted to leave in peace.
  2. Rebellion is never acceptable from a Christian worldview. Those who promote it are wrong to do so, and a Christian espousing a rebellion is doing so in direct violation of myriad commands to respect authority.
  3. The Civil War itself was not about slavery. The South seceded over slavery, but the war happened because the North broke away from the Constitution and treated them as rebels for leaving. Their cause for leaving? Entirely unjust, but legally allowable. Their cause for fighting the war? Entirely justified because the North had no right to disregard the usual courtesies expected for passage between nations and the parleys that would occur between both. So while there were certainly problems and hypocrisies in that time of our nation, the war itself was neither a civil war nor was it acceptable for Lincoln to decide to get us into a war because he wanted to force them to stay. That was the move of a dictator, just as King George III’s behavior was, not that of a ruler abiding by the laws he and the rest of his government agreed to be bound by through a contract with those around them. Had he treated them as an opposing country and tried to conquer them like Germany did to France or other countries through history have, he might’ve been given some leeway, but he didn’t, and so, while he might not have been a bad man personally, he was nonetheless a dictator who chose to ignore the rules he was required to operate under by law.

I know many people would argue with these conclusions, but facts are facts. While no situation is every fully black and white, particularly with wars, the facts that lead to us being able to declare something a rebellion or a war of self-defense are not. Those distinctions lie solely in facts and definitions, whether we like it or not. Though we shouldn’t disregard or marginalize the uglier sides of history or try to pretend they were justified, let us also avoid declaring those on the losing side entirely unjust in their defense of themselves or in declaring the winners justified simply because they have won. This is what we have done when it comes to our country’s history, and while it is commonly understood that the winners write the history books, we cannot be a people who disregards truth or fact in favor of emotion and perception simply because the latter is more favorable. To do so is to destroy our very foundations and ourselves, and this is exactly what we have chosen to do in modern society.

We have not improved or moved away from the very same attitudes that inspired the Civil War in modern society. There is still a desire on various sides of the issue to ignore history, ignore our country’s founding principles in favor of whichever flavor of hypocrisy we prefer, and to demonize the other side simply to support our own. If we wish to have another war where we split into two countries, this is the path to follow. But if we want to learn from history, avoid its same mistakes in present day, and finally move past what was done in the past, then we’re going to have to be honest about the facts. I hope today’s exploration into the background on these two wars has been informative and beneficial.

Sunday Stories: First to Stop Applauding

New Blog Schedule

Introduction

The scene is a political rally for Stalin in the Soviet Union. A tribute to Stalin is called, and a standing ovation is given for a man who isn’t even present. Three minutes turns into five, and on it goes. No one dares to stop applauding even if they do not agree with the regime and even if they’re so exhausted they want to drop. Enthusiasm wanes as the applause goes on, stretching out to eight minutes. Everyone knows the police are watching, and even if they drop dead, they won’t stop clapping.

At eleven minutes in, a paper factory directory on the platform does what not even the leaders have dared do. He stops clapping and sits down. The false enthusiasm in the rest of the crowd disappears, and to a man, they too stop and sit. Russian Author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who saw much of this first hand, describes this very scene and concludes it on this note:

The squirrel had been smart enough to jump off his revolving wheel. That, however, was how they discovered who the independent people were. And that was how they went about eliminating them. That same night, the factory director was arrested. They easily pasted ten years on him on the pretext of something quite different. But after he had signed Form 206, the final document of the interrogation, his interrogator reminded him: 

“Don’t ever be the first to stop applauding.”

The Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitsyn

An Applause Mentality and Leftist Culture

So why start off with that quote from Solzhenitsyn and the story he told? Because our culture is much like the men watching for who would stop applauding first to find the independent ones and shut them down. How, you ask?

Well, we don’t arrest independent thinkers, yet, in this country. But what we have seen in the liberal/progressivist mentality is a shift from simply requesting that dissenting voices be silent to demanding that dissenters applaud even the most abhorrent acts known to man. I point out the liberals and their agenda (on a government scale, certainly, but also on a personal scale at times) because they are usually the ones who scream the loudest in this country. They’ve got a peculiar mob mentality and seem to think that if they shout louder than anyone else, they’ll be right.

It’s a very odd phenomenon that I’ve observed in person as well as secondhand, and I rarely see that in conservatives. Sure, conservatives have their issues, but shutting down free speech, mob mentality toward the opposition, and demanding that the opposition applaud what they’re doing aren’t usually among them. On average, conservatives tend to be the types who do what they believe is best and right and don’t care if it’s going to cause them trouble. (Note that this isn’t true of government officials, typically, even in the right wing/conservative group, but when it comes to behaviors seen in the voting demographic, this tends to be how things work.)

Now, it used to be that it was enough if we simply didn’t speak up loudly in opposition to liberal agendas on hot button issues such as education, abortion, racial issues, or LGBTQ+. No longer is tolerance enough. Today’s culture (or at least the loudest ones in it) demand that we also approve. We can’t stay quiet and just avoid voicing dissent to get by and avoid persecution anymore.

Nowhere is this more clearly seen than in those individuals who say such things as “All whites are racist devils from birth” or “It’s great that you whites supported us, but that doesn’t get you out of paying for what your ancestors did” or “You support pro-life? Then you’re anti-women, sexist, and straight up backwards-minded”. These are things I’ve actually seen and heard people say!

If we need any further evidence that ours is an applause culture, we need look no further than these examples or the current chaos going on over black rights, defunding the police, and silencing anyone who disagrees. Even blacks are not exempt from the wrath of people in the BLM movement, for example, if they choose to speak up and dissent. One black veteran, who spoke out against the mentality and culture in black communities that has led to the violence we’re seeing now, was injured in a hit and run shortly after by protesters who didn’t like what he’d said. Another black man who dissented and spoke out against them for their behavior was shot in the head and died for daring to speak out. That doesn’t even begin to include the number of black cops who have died trying to defend innocents from angry mobs who only showed up to kill, loot, and destroy.

Other Examples

In case what I gave earlier wasn’t enough, let’s look at some other examples.

Anyone who’s not willing to applaud BLM and the rioting going on right now? Well, we’ve already seen what happened to individuals from the black community itself who disagreed. But if you’re white? How can you be so racist? That’s the outcry. You aren’t supporting us? Your silence on it doesn’t exonerate you. It means you support our oppression and hate us like the racist bigots you are. At one time, silence on the issue wouldn’t be an indicator of wanting oppression to continue. It would’ve meant the person didn’t agree with some subset of what was being said or simply had no opinion on the issue.

Christian artists who run their own businesses? It used to be enough for you to just be quiet about your beliefs regarding the LGBTQ+ community. You weren’t targeted by the hateful segment of the community (and to be clear, not everyone in the community is hateful. I’ve known some really awesome people who were a part of the community. I didn’t approve of their lifestyle, but they remain some of the kindest, nicest people I’ve ever known.), and you weren’t forced to create works of art celebrating a lifestyle you had a religious and conscionable objection to. But not anymore. Show your support and celebrate their lifestyle or end up in court and lose your own lifestyle because you wouldn’t applaud like everyone else.

What about pro-lifers? You aren’t willing to openly show your support for those who want to help women murder their own babies in the womb? You dare to tell those women, however gently or kindly, that there’s another option? You want to take away the choice to murder a baby and leave them with only three options (contraception, abstinence, or pregnancy)? Then you’re against women and want to force them to carry a baby against their will. Being quietly pro-life will no longer protect you from the social suicide of having an opinion that isn’t socially accepted.

What about those who want to raise their own children and teach them without government interference? According to an article published in Harvard’s journal and written by a Harvard lawyer/professor, you’re a nutcase and your children will be white supremacists (never mind the fact that there’s a sizable community of black and Hispanic homeschoolers too). If they don’t show immediate signs of white supremacy, then they’re just ticking time bombs. Worse still, they’re probably going to end up being religious (because that’s such a bad thing in a country that has historically prized freedom of religion).

Furthermore, you’re abusing your child because you might not be educated enough to provide them quality education. (Statistics actually show that homeschoolers generally outperform public and private schoolers on standardized tests, which are the generally accepted method of testing how well-educated and intelligent a given student is compared to the rest of the student population from any given demographic.) Society looks down on homeschooled kids. While they can generally get into colleges with their standardized achievement test scores, some colleges have more rigorous and difficult enrollment requirements for homeschoolers specifically. We have to jump through more hoops simply because our parents dared to educate us at home even if we’ve proven we’re just as well-educated and smart as any of our peers in a government run school.

What if you dare to stop applauding?

No matter how polite you are in daring to sit down, society will decry you. They can’t handle any voices that don’t fit the narrative that liberal government and media have established. There’s no room in our system for voices that disagree. We’re too advanced and intelligent for that, and anyone who doesn’t agree with the generally accepted beliefs that the majority (or the loudest voices) promotes is backwards and, possibly, a danger to society.

If you’re a public figure, you’ll find your character will be demeaned and your goals, however honorable, decried simply because you were the one who dared have them. Heaven help you if you’re a conservative Christian who refuses to comply. You’re going to be socially crucified.

The Leftist mentality can tolerate no independent thinkers if the conclusion is one that doesn’t fit with their narrative and their goals. While not every individual who is a Democrat or liberal is like this (I’ve known my fair share of those who are more polite than some conservatives and Republicans I know), the overall mindset promoted and pushed by the Leftist, liberal agenda is one of intolerance toward anyone who doesn’t conform and applaud for their ways and their agendas.

As I said earlier, I’ve been on the receiving end of their intolerant, hateful attitude toward anyone who disagrees more than once. As an author who is Christian and also unafraid to speak my mind, I’ve personally experienced the backlash from a mob of Leftist liberals who didn’t like the fact that I didn’t support everything they thought I should. I’ve been called a racist, labeled as un-Christian because I wouldn’t approve of the things God has clearly denounced as sinful and wicked, called unintelligent and told I’m living in a fantasy world when I presented stats and facts that contradicted what was being claimed, mocked because of being a homeschooler, accused of being bigoted because I didn’t agree with murder in the name of “justice”, and looked down on as naive just because I was Christian. People make judgments about me all the time because of my background without even knowing me and, often, without actually listening to anything I’ve said. The list goes on.

If I’ve learned anything about society during my childhood and teen years, it’s that no matter how hard someone tries to fit in and do what they’re told to, think what they’re told to, and say what they’re told to, it will never be enough. More will always be demanded, especially in a society rushing headlong into insanity and depravity. I learned early on not to bother trying to fit in. I learned that doing the right thing was always more important than the socially acceptable thing. I learned that while there is a kind way to tell someone they’re believing a load of lies, it isn’t kind or loving to allow someone to believe lies to their own detriment. I experienced the hatred society had for people like me firsthand growing up.

My first exposure to the ugliness of racism was on the playground when I asked a few black kids to play, thinking they might want to be included because most kids do, and I was told “White kids don’t play with black kids.” They said that with as much disdain and harshness as little kids can muster. But they learned it from somewhere. I ran into that attitude frequently from blacks around me, just as much as I ran into blacks who were some of the sweetest, kindest people I knew. And I learned from that. I learned that ugliness exists in humanity regardless of color or “race”. I learned that two people who look very similar can be totally opposite in their behaviors, thought patterns, and treatment of others around them. Selfish, rude, bigoted behavior can exist on any level in any person regardless of race, sexual orientation, or religion because people are people no matter what shape or color they may come in. 

Is my viewpoint popular? No. Do I know exactly what it’s like to live in the culture that blacks live in where kids often get picked on for wanting to learn because it’s more cool to skip class instead (something I’ve heard a few blacks say lately)? No, I don’t. But that doesn’t mean I don’t know what discrimination and disdain for someone else on the basis of something they can’t change looks like. I do know that first hand, and it makes me sad that anyone would have to experience that today. Equally, it makes me very, very angry when I see anyone treating someone as if they’re a lesser human being for any reason, regardless of what that reason is, because I know what it’s like to be the one frowned upon, disapproved of, and shunned just because I didn’t fit the system’s narrative.

Why Christians Need to Stop Applauding Today’s Culture and Society

The most obvious reason to stop applauding is that we’re being asked to applaud out-and-out wickedness. I’ll be the first in line to applaud things like putting a corrupt cop in jail for unnecessary force that led to anyone’s death, arresting those who allow hatred of another to cloud their vision to the point that they commit murder, or giving the death sentence to a serial rapist. I’d also be the first in line, however, to demand that abortions stop because they are taking the lives of babies, and we are not given the permission to take the life of anyone except in very specific instances, none of which include killing infants who haven’t done anything wrong. I’ll be the first in line to applaud dealing with clear cases of injustice in our world that lead to the mistreatment of those around me even if I disagree with those people’s lifestyles or moral choices because injustice is injustice and that person has an inalienable right to the same freedoms I enjoy regardless of what I think of them personally.

But I will never  applaud for those who want anarchy, for those who hate another just because they’re a different color (and to clarify, that means both black and white groups because both do this and have done it in the past), for those blaming an entire skin color group for their problems as if every individual in that group is to blame by virtue of the skin tone they were born with, for those who ignore the facts and the truth in favor of emotion and pure evil, for those who want to kill defenseless babies, for those who want to subvert or outright destroy the concept that marriage is between one man and one woman as God ordained it, or for those who advocate murdering those who did nothing wrong. That’s a group that stands for sin and injustice, not for good and justice, and for those people I refuse to applaud.

And make no mistake about this. No Christian who is going to stand by Scripture and God would or should support those things. Beyond that, a Christian living in the light of God’s Word will not applaud anything that Word says is evil or sinful. As such, though we are called to love those who do sinful things, we must be the first to stop clapping for what they’re doing, even if the system demands our applause. If refusing to applaud gains us persecution in any form, so be it. We obey God first and our authorities in so far as they do not demand we do something directly against God’s commands. 

We are called to be salt and light to a dying world. Light should hold no darkness or untruth in it, nor should it applaud those things. We are called to love those around us. But love does not stand aside and stay silent as those it is directed toward run to their ultimate demise. It stands in the way, earnestly pleads with the erring one, and speaks truth even at its own expense.

Doing what we’ve been called to do means facing suffering and persecution. We need to do it anyway.

So I’m sitting down. I will be the first to stop clapping for the evils our society is promoting, even if I choose not to clap and no one follows suit. If that means arrest, social suicide, or actual death in order to stand by my God and what is true, right, and pure, so be it. To go against God and conscience to stand for evil and sin is neither safe nor wise.

Conclusion

To my brothers and sisters in Christ… Please stop applauding what is going on in today’s society. The looting, burning, rioting, killing of innocents, abortion of our own children, and destruction of the Biblical principles our country stood on for more than a century after its founding are sickening to God. He makes it clear that murder, hatred, destruction of others, theft, and insubordination to authority (except in the case where demanded to go against God Himself, who is the ultimate authority) are unacceptable. They are sin. 

We must be the light to a dying world, or we must bear a guilt and shame far greater than anything that could be laid at our feet by the world for not having the “politically correct” actions and words. Our shame should be rooted in our applause for the world’s insanity in the first place. Our ancestors may have applauded slavery in their time, and that was to their shame. We now applaud further evils in the name of reversing the evil that our ancestors (in some of our cases, anyway) created by applauding the evils of their day. If we should need to apologize for anything to the world around us, it should be for living in a way that told them God was a joke and His Word a lie. It should be for not loving them enough to sit down and stop applauding for their wickedness. It should be for not caring enough to stand up for the truth and to plead with them earnestly to repent before it’s too late. Those are the things we need to apologize for if we claim to believe in God and His Word but then applaud the world because in doing that, we have defied our Lord’s commands and made Him a liar to a lost and dying world.

So Christians, let’s be the first to stop clapping for everything that should make us weep for the atrocities being committed. That is our moral duty and our God-given responsibility if we’re going to be salt and light as we’ve been called to be. It’s time we took it seriously.

Sunday Stories: The Attributes of God

Ariel Paiement

Introduction

This week’s focus is on the attributes of God. Attributes are concrete details about who He is; it differs from essence in that essence is what makes Him God while an attribute is part of how He works out what makes Him God. For example, if I were describing attributes of my own, I might say I have hazel eyes. It’s a part of who I am concretely, but it doesn’t tell anyone what I’m like in terms of behavior or personality. It does not tell you who I am, only some aspect of what I appear as physically. In the case of God being a spirit, we can understand attributes to be a description of how His essence impacts us and our world. He has no physical attributes to describe, but He does have some very important attributes that link to His essence.

These attributes fall into two categories: those not linked to morality and those that are. We’ll start with the non-moral attributes, and then when we reach the moral ones, we’ll start off with a discussion of why morality must be linked to God and why these attributes matter so much.

Non-Moral Attributes

Omnipresence (Acts 17:27-28; Hebrews 4:13)

This attribute links directly to God’s immensity, which we discussed last time in the discussion on God’s essence. What is omnipresence? It is a logical conclusion or extension of His immensity that states God is present everywhere and at all times, not in pieces of Himself spread out to reach everyone but in His entirety due to how immense He is. If you haven’t yet read the post I wrote on God’s essence, please start there. This post isn’t going to make much sense without it because you can’t understand the end conclusion properly if you haven’t seen where it began.

Omniscience (Proverbs 15:3; Psalm 147:5; Matthew 10:30; Micah 5:2)

When it comes to omniscience, this is God’s ability to know all things, and it stems from both His immensity and His eternity/infinity. Because of these essences of God, He knows everything down to things so minute we don’t even think of or care about them. This links directly to the concept that His knowledge is infinite in both breadth and depth, but also in time. Nothing can, has, or ever will surprise God, and He will never need to learn anything new. He already knows it all.

Omnipotence (Genesis 17:11; Job 42:2; Jeremiah 32:17; Matthew 19:26)

This is the attribute of God that is all-powerful, all-mighty, and undaunted by even the greatest or most impossible feats. This one, however, will usually lead to a question from skeptics and even some believers. If God is all these things, particularly if He is all powerful, why allow sin? And why not save everyone?

This leads to an essential point in our discussion that must be made before we go further. If you miss this, then falling into doctrinal errors and heresies surrounding God’s nature become very, very easy.

How He Exercises His Attributes

The key point here is to look at what God says about and reveals about Himself, both in Scripture and in the world around us. He is a God of order. Furthermore, He Himself does not change, and He is unable to deny His nature because to do so would be to change. Therefore, when it comes to His attributes, He must therefore exercise them in a way that is not only consistent with His nature but also in a way that will not violate any other attribute. If He exercised His attributes in a way that violated another attribute, that would be to violate part of His nature, and as we made clear here and in the previous article on His essence, that is not something God will do.

But if He’s all powerful, why can’t He will that He exercise love and ignore His justice, holiness, and other attributes, for example, to just allow everyone into heaven? Because He only does what He wills, and He is clear that He doesn’t want sin, inconsistency in His nature, or violation of His attributes.

This is why those who focus on just His love or just His judgment then must force His use of one attribute to violate another. Most people who say things like “God wouldn’t do that because He’s all loving” or “There are some sins that are greater than others/will send you to hell if you’re living in them” don’t realize that what they are doing is saying “God will exercise this attribute I like more over the others, even if it requires Him to violate or invalidate the other in doing so”. But that is in fact what they are saying when they pick one attribute to focus on and ignore or sideline another. They are essentially saying that God is, at best, inconsistent or, at worst, that He has changed in His nature.

So in conclusion on this particular attribute, He is able to do anything, but He will not do everything because He has control over His power, and He knows how to exercise it according to His will and in accordance with His nature. (Habakkuk 1:13; II Timothy 2:13; James 1:13)

Immutability (James 1:17; Malachi 3:6; Romans 11:29)

Immutability is the attribute that has do with His unchanging aspect. He cannot mutate or change either Himself or His will and the plan that He established before the foundation of the world. They will never alter due to any outside force or influence either. Furthermore, He doesn’t change His mind on His promises or His dictates. (Numbers 23:19; Psalm 110:4)

But then, you will ask, what about when it says God repented of what He was going to do in various Bible passages? A valid question until you actually dig into the word repent, but let’s start out with giving a few examples people often bring up. In Exodus 32:14, we have Moses interceding for the people, and God “repenting of the evil He had thought to do”. Then, in II Samuel 24:16, there was a plague God had sent on the nation of Israel in punishment for their king’s disobedience in numbering the people, which was an act of pride and desire to compete on the level of nations around the nation of Israel as well as in direct disobedience to God’s clear dictate not to do so. The plague was so bad that it would have wiped out the nation of Israel had it continued, but God stays His hand in this verse and says it is enough.

Sure looks like God is changing His mind and His will in these passages, doesn’t it? People have a real issue with this idea that God could start out in one direction and then change to another without having changed His will. Furthermore, this leads to a difficulty with God altering the way He handles people through time and the idea of dispensationalism (the concept that God dealt with different people with different approaches at different points in history). For example, He only allowed approach to Him through Israel in the Old Testament. But the law didn’t save; it was a way to show trust and obedience to God before Christ. So now that Christ has come, God changed the approach and has said we must come to Him through Christ alone, not through the Law and our own merit, which can never truly restore fellowship. The Law was no longer necessary, then, because Christ’s death allowed Him to write the Law on our hearts.

But people struggle with this because they assume that a change in approach means a change in nature. This is a fallacious understanding. Why? To understand, we have to look at the word “repent” used in the KJV version of the passages in Exodus and II Samuel, and we also have to take a look at whose perspective that “repenting” is being viewed from.

Repent and the Perspective It is Given To Us From In God’s Word

Repent means to change direction in its simplest form. It means to stop doing what you are and to go another way. This in and of itself doesn’t really help people to understand why a change in approach doesn’t equal a change in nature though, nor does it clear up the confusion as to how God can change approach and not change His will. To understand that, we have to combine this definition with an understanding of whose perspective this word is seen from.

The important thing most people miss is that repent is seen from the viewpoint of humanity, not God’s. How do we know that? First of all, if God could change His mind in a way that changes His actual will, He wouldn’t be eternal, omniscient, or immense. This would, in the end, make Him no longer God as His eternal and immense essences are a part of what makes Him God. Without them, He would not be Himself.

At the end of the day, then, we will all go the way God planned, and God’s plan won’t change. But why say repent then? Because God did, in a sense, “change His mind” from our perspective. We do not have the eternal perspective, so to Moses pleading with God not to destroy Israel or to David praying for God not to wipe out the nation of Israel (something God had promised wouldn’t happen), it would look very much like God changed His mind or His desires in response to their prayers of faith. But what really happened?

The reality is that if God were to go through with what He was doing all the way to the end, doing so would force Him to violate His promises or His nature, neither of which being things He can do. The end goal therefore was not what we assumed it was, but often He allows something to start or sends us down a path for a time to teach, correct, or prepare us with that end goal in mind. He knows what He’s doing. And even though we look at the path and wonder why God would “change His mind” or send us to do something He “didn’t want us to do”, the reality is that the direction you were headed in was a part of the plan but wasn’t going to be the only direction He needed to take us to get to the end. So, while we could see the change in direction as His changing His mind, the reality that is in keeping with His nature is that His plan always had the change in direction there.

This is in keeping with the fact that He knows everything. He already knew we or others around us needed to go in one direction for a while before heading off in another in order for His plan both on a personal level and on a much larger scale to come to fruition. If we understand then both the meaning of the word repent and the perspective in which the Bible presents it to help us understand a God who is so far from human that without human words we couldn’t understand, then this is no longer a problem like so many feel it is.

Moral Attributes

Now we get to the second section of this topic: morality and moral attributes.

To begin with, we must understand why it is important that God has attributes linked to morality. This is because morality only exists if there is an outside standard above anything we can understand. Why do I say this? Well, let’s take an example from today’s world. Some people object to God and any worldview that contains Him because if God exists He allowed Hitler, and Hitler was evil. But if God doesn’t exist, why was Hitler wrong? Why was Hitler wrong but euthanasia, abortion, and other crimes against humanity are all okay? We as individuals all put value on lives. It’s normal to do so. We recognize an intrinsic worth to them. But if God is removed from the equation, then those who have removed Him still put value on lives, but they must define it their own way. Therefore, those who object to Hitler object not on the grounds of true morality, but on the grounds that he did not determine value in a way they agreed with. They determine value in their own minds and use that value on life or those moral guidelines to determine whether others are right or wrong.

But here’s the problem. If it comes from us, it can’t be morality. If there is no absolute standard, no yardstick to measure by that is unchanging, then we cannot judge anyone for anything they do. Murdering people en mass is okay. Killing babies is okay. Rape, incest, molestation? All okay. Maybe certain individuals don’t want to do those things, but they do not have any standard by which they can say “you are wrong because you do those things” since all they have is their own opinion, which, without a being outside of us to validate it, is as valid as the opinion of the serial killer raping and killing women.

People don’t like this. But truth is truth regardless of one’s feelings. Anyone who believes there is a God or that the Bible is infallible must, by their own belief system, therefore believe in right or wrong, and they must use God’s yardstick, not their own, to measure by.

But those who do not believe there is a God or that the Bible is infallible must also, by their own belief system, believe there is no absolute truth, no real right or wrong, and must therefore allow all things even if they themselves do not wish to participate in a given action. Equally so, anyone who says that we cannot know God or that we cannot trust what He has said in Scripture because it is not God’s revelation but is man’s ideas, must also say the same. If you don’t know the measuring stick and haven’t been given it, you are left in the same moral quagmire as those who have declared there is no God but fickle humanity, which changes its ideas of right and wrong on a whim.

With that established, what attributes of God are linked to morality, and what kind of measuring stick do they give us for determining right and wrong in our world?

Holiness (Leviticus 19:2; Isaiah 40:23; Exodus 26:33; 1 Peter 1:15-16; John 17:11; Psalm 47:8; Psalm 89:14; and Isaiah 6:1-3)

The word holy or holiness means completely apart from. In God’s case, the Bible uses the word to indicate that He is completely apart from and exalted above all creation as our Creator. But in the case of humans who have been redeemed, it means we are set apart from the world (but not exalted above it as we are still human and are not God).

When it comes to God, this attribute encompasses the ideas that He is separate from His creation, sin, unrighteousness, and moral evil. This is the unchanging yardstick by which we then measure ourselves against when it comes to morality, or at least, a part of it. When compared to a spotless, blameless God who has never once done anything evil, we who have shed innocent blood and sacrificed our children on the altars of false gods or the altar of our own selfishness suddenly seem a lot more wicked. Even those who might say, well, I’ve never murdered anyone or done child sacrifice, are stained black by their own sins when faced with something as pure as a holy God.

Look at it this way. If you dumped red wine onto a white dress, would the stain be any less red and obvious just because you only dumped a little onto it and not an entire glass? No. The red stain would still stick out like a sore thumb because the dress is such a pure, bright white that any spot or blemish must show. God’s holiness is like that dress, pure and radiant, and we are, when compared to it, all the red stain.

Did God’s Holiness Disappear In The New Testament?

There are some who would say that God got rid of His unwavering holiness in favor of His love when the New Testament rolled around. Those who say this believe that He loves everyone and will therefore excuse the sin that stains us despite the fact that His holiness keeps Him from having fellowship with evil, unrighteousness, and sin. This is not accurate.

His holiness cannot disappear in the New Testament because it is the basis for all other moral attributes, including His love. It is the first one we’ve discussed for that very reason. If you remove His holiness, He is no different from Zeus or other pagan gods who were just like us (or worse), slept with anything that moved in many cases, and did all manner of reprehensible things. Emphasize anything above His holiness, and you reduce Him to that level.

Furthermore, God’s holiness is the basis for needing salvation and the basis for Christ’s death on the cross in the first place. If God had ceased to be holy, not only would He cease to be God, but He never would have needed to send Christ to die for us in order to restore the fellowship broken when Adam and Eve sinned. His holiness demanded that the stain of sin be removed before fellowship could be restored. But as the one offended by our affront and our sin in Adam and Eve’s fall, He had to be the one to reach out and bridge the gap created by broken fellowship. The offended must reach out to the offender to restore, not the other way around. The offender can plead for forgiveness, restoration, and mercy, but if the offended chooses not to give it, then nothing can fix the rift the offender created. As such, God had to initiate, and man had nothing to do with that choice to initiate. They played no role in it and, in fact, as we often see, wanted nothing to do with restoration anyway.

So then, God’s holiness must be the first moral attribute we understand and behold, and it must also not cease simply because a Savior was sent or His approach to us changed in accordance with His Son’s death on the cross. For if it did, then He would cease to be God and Christ’s death on the cross would be meaningless for one man with a sin nature cannot die to redeem another with the same ailment.

Righteousness and Judgment/Justice (Psalm 89:14; Isaiah 61:8; II Chronicles 6:15; Exodus 34:7)

This moral attribute is a natural extension of His holiness. Because He is the holy creator and is above His creation, He has the right to pass judgment on His creation. God is also a God who loves the concept of right versus wrong. If he didn’t, we wouldn’t even have a right and wrong, nor would we have a conscience, which stems directly from His concern with us knowing what He views as right versus wrong. This attribute states that God’s justice rewards right and punishes wrong, even if He is longsuffering (patient) and does not immediately heap condemnation on the heads of those who have done wrong.

God’s Goodness (Mark 10:18; I John 4:8,10; I John 4:16; Job 14:5; Psalm 145:9; Matthew 5:45)

This moral attribute of God has four sub sections. We’ll start with His love.

God’s Love (Mark 10:18; 1 John 4:8,10,16)

God is love. Does that statement strike some of you as a little strange? If you’ve grown up in certain sectors of the Church, then you hear about His judgment all the time, but you don’t hear much about God being love. That’s what the Bible says though. He doesn’t just have love; He is love. Furthermore, only God is truly, completely good and therefore capable of fully loving in the sense the Bible presents (though through His grace and power, His children can show this love as well).

What kind of love is God? It isn’t an emotional love or one that ebbs and flows. It is agape love, which in the Bible is a love that leads to action characterized by sacrifice. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the death of Christ on the cross for our salvation.

God’s Benevolence (Job 14:5; Psalm 145:9; Matthew 5:45)

This second category of His goodness is the way in which He takes care of His creation regardless of whether they serve Him, acknowledge Him, and so on. He often goes above and beyond what we need and allows us to prosper, even if we turn our backs on Him and choose not to serve Him.

Why is this? Well, as one wise person said, for a Christian, this world is the only Hell we’ll ever know. For the unsaved, however, this world is the only heaven they will ever know. So while God is benevolent to all on this earth and in this life, those who reject Him in spite of His love and His benevolence have an eternity of suffering ahead, according to the Bible. So why should we be concerned about whether the wicked temporarily prosper when we know their end? Instead of being jealous, an understanding of God’s benevolence leads us to pity them and pray earnestly for their salvation.

God’s Mercy (Ephesians 2:4; Romans 11:30-31; Isaiah 55:7)

God’s mercy is the way in which His goodness is shown to those in distress. It is not exercised all the time toward everyone. This is important because it leads to the point that He can exercise His attributes differently in different situations. Going back to what we focused on earlier, God won’t exercise one attribute in a way that violates another. So if He exercises His mercy in a way that overlooks justice, then it would violate His holiness and righteousness, and He will not do so. But if He can exercise it in a way that doesn’t violate the other attributes, He is free to do so.

This means that because of His nature, He cannot do unfair or unjust things just to be nice. Think about that. How often do we hear people say things like God would never send so and so to Hell because they never heard the Gospel and that would be cruel, or God would never do ABC because He’s loving? I bet we’ve all heard those statements. Maybe we’ve even said them. The problem with this is that if we say those things, what we’re really saying is that God will do unfair, unjust things in order to be nice to those people. They are saying His love takes precedence over and violates His other attributes.

This is another attribute that relates to salvation, as well. God needed a way to save that satisfied holiness by not ignoring our sin and leaving us unchanged in that sin. But He also needed to satisfy His goodness. So, He sent Christ, God incarnate, to take our sin because He alone had none of His own sins to pay for and had an infinite ability to exchange His life for ours through substitutionary atonement.

God’s Grace

This aspect of God’s goodness is the way He manifests it to those who have actively gone out of their way to be undeserving. This is shown to man in general in His forebearance with us. One sin, one time is enough to make Him just in simply killing us as that is the penalty for sin, but instead, His grace constrains Him, and He chooses not to immediately mete out punishment. But it is also shown more specifically to individuals in our salvation, which the Bible is very clear is through grace in Jesus Christ.

Truth (Job 38:1-2; Job 27:1-6)

This is the last moral attribute of God, and it simply is that God, in what He knows, what He declares, and what He says about Himself and creation, is utterly true and unbiased. Only God is fully capable of being utterly true and unbiased. Humanity has perceptions and perspectives, and we see reality through those perceptions. Some of us are closer to the truth than others, but we are not infallibly true like God is in our understanding.

This is an important point because unless God sees reality with no bias or perception, the Bible cannot be infallibly true. Unless He is truth and is outside of creation, so utterly holy that we cannot fully comprehend Him, the Bible isn’t trustworthy because His perceptions and ideas about the universe, creation, and even Himself, might not be totally accurate or infallible. So we see that if this point or any of the other attributes He holds are removed, He must cease to be truly God and we can therefore know nothing for certain about a Creator or the Divine because there is no source but our own imagination to turn to.

Conclusion

I hope that this discussion has been both instructive and grounding for my fellow believers as well as thought-provoking for those who do not believe. Our perception and idea of God (who He is, His character, and His very existence even) is the single most important thing we think because on it must rest everything else about our worldview. Our belief in God or our lack of it determines how we live our lives, what we do, and why we think what we do, even if we don’t recognize it.

Christians, if we have a wrong view of God, we end up on tenuous ground, unable to fully support our own arguments to either a world going to Hell or to other Christians who challenge us. In I Peter, God tells us through Peter that we should be ready to give an answer for the hope that is in us. But if we do not know the God we serve, we are in danger of being unable to give that answer to a world that needs to see it. I know that this study has definitely helped to ground me personally and to solidify why I believe what I do about God, and my hope and prayer is that it has done the same for you. We have the answers for a critical, lost world right in front of us, so let us not be ignorant of them and therefore represent to the world a God who is not the God of the Bible.

Sunday Stories: Learning Who God Is

New Blog Schedule

Introduction

Recently, my family has begun a study into various aspects of Christianity and learning about the nature of God or theology. This has really gotten me thinking because it’s not a subject often discussed in churches. Certainly not in liberal ones, and sadly, not even in conservative ones. It is avoided, and I believe there is a reason for that. It isn’t a good one either.

Why It Matters

The reason this subject is the starting point and matters so greatly is that no study of how we ourselves should apply Biblical principles can be complete or accurate if we do not know the nature of God. As Tozer says, “What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us. … Worship is pure or base as the worshiper entertains high or low thoughts of God.

“For this reason the gravest question before the Church is always God Himself, and the most portentous fact about any man is not what he at a given time may say or do, but what he in his deep heart conceives God to be like. We tend by a secret law of the soul to move toward our mental image of God. This is true not only of the individual Christian, but of the company of Christians that composes the Church. Always the most revealing thing about the Church is her idea of God, just as her most significant message is what she says about Him or leaves unsaid, for her silence is often more eloquent than her speech…”

What We Believe About God Has A Huge Impact On How We Live Our Lives

Truer words might never have been spoken. What we believe about God defines how we come to the Bible, and it defines how we approach every single thing about our lives. If we believe He is a being that will accept us however we are, then we can comfortably live our lives however we please for the knowledge of the holy is insignificant and need not affect anything of the divine.

But if there is a God who has a nature that we can, if there is a God whom we can see anything of in the order of nature and the natural laws, if there is a God revealed through His own revelation to man in the Scriptures? If we know that God, then we know our view of Him must impact every aspect of our lives, leaving no area untouched. Not education, not our beliefs, not any action or part of our lives. 

We must hold all up to the light of who that God is, not our imagination of who God is. For if the Bible is true and if there is anything we can see of God’s nature from the natural world, our imaginations of who God is are invalidated and only the truth of who He has said He is can stand. But if it is not true, if any part of it isn’t true, then it is one person’s imagination of God against another and there is no way to know anything. Simply put, there would be nothing different between Jehovah God and Zeus for we can no more know Him than the ancient Greeks could understand and know Zeus. With no clear indication of who God is from His own revelation of Himself, He remains so high above our imaginations that we have no hope of understanding Him and therefore no hope of understanding His actions, how we might gain His favor, or how we ought to act in order to gain a favorable eternity.

The Results of Not Believing the Bible Is Infallible and God’s Word

We see the results of a belief that Scripture is unreliable in many religions and beliefs. Some have thrown it out entirely, and they believe all manner of things. Their beliefs range from the belief that there is some cosmic energy they’ll become a part of to the belief that there is no heaven, only constant reincarnation until one reaches a state of enlightenment. But sadly Christian groups have also fallen prey to this belief. Many liberal churches and most if not all Catholic churches teach that the Bible is only a group of stories that are meant to give us instruction into how to live a good life.

Of course, if this is true, then what shall we base our morals upon? Our own ideas of morality cannot be trusted. They have produced men like Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini. Our own moral codes vary widely and can become very, very messed up. But if we cannot trust our own and we are, as those who claim the Bible can’t be trusted might say, unable to know God at all, where then can our moral codes come from? They have to come from a higher power. But if you cannot know the higher power whom they come from, then you have a serious issue because you also can’t know what that higher power’s standards are for morality. For all you can determine, the higher power could be happy with Hitler and angry with your own “good” behavior. There is zero basis to say what is moral and what is not if the Bible is not true, then. 

What Does God’s Nature Have to Do With This?

God’s nature comes into play because it is necessary for us to understand anything at all about Him or what He expects. Several very basic things must be true of God’s nature if any of us are going to be able to understand Him in even a limited capacity. After all, if the Bible is true, then God’s goal is to have a relationship with us. As with any relationship, there are boundaries and rules to follow. While the relationship isn’t all about rules, it is governed in some ways by them. But what relationship that is loving and good can function with no communication of expectations or the personality of the individuals involved? Therefore, to have a relationship with us, God must reveal both His nature and His expectations.

And that leads us to the main focus of this Sunday Story and the next. For today, I want to go over what I’ve been learning about the essence of God. God’s essence are those things that make Him God. They are different from attributes, which I’ll discuss next time, in that they are not physical descriptions of Him and are often harder to pin down. But they’re important because without them, many of the attributes that Christianity and the Bible assign to God have no basis to stand on.

God’s Essence

God is a Spirit

First on the list, we have the essence of God being a spirit. Or, a better way to say is that God is spirit. (Luke 24:39 and John 4:24). Sometimes, God uses anthropomorphism in His Word to help us to understand Him. Some examples of this are in 1 Kings 8:29 where the people pray God’s eyes will be on them, but because He is Spirit, He has no real, physical eyes. Or, in Nehemiah 1:6, Nehemiah refers to His ears and eyes as he cries out to God. Again, because God is spirit, He doesn’t have physical eyes or ears, but He uses those to give us an understanding of Him. It’s important, however, to know that He has no literal physical traits because if He did, He would have the physical limitations we do.

He is Invisible

Second under this point is the concept that He is invisible (Deut. 4:15-19; John 1:18; 1 Tim. 6:16). This is why we’re not supposed to make up something or to create something that we call God or serve as God. This means not just creating idols we serve as a god but also setting up anything that we serve as the God of the Bible when it does not match with the God of the Bible. So when we replace God with our own image of who God is instead of how He presents Himself in His word, we create an idol, even if it isn’t the usual golden statues and wooden images we typically imagine in Christianity when told not to create idols. Furthermore, the passage in John adds another layer to this in giving us the distinction between God the Father and God the Son. It does this by making it clear that God is Spirit while the Son, though fully God, is the physical manifestation of God the Father. If you miss this, then it’s easy to land yourself in a lot of Biblically inconsistent beliefs, such as saying that Christ wasn’t God or was only partially God and partially human instead of 100% both at the same time.

Finally under this point, God is alive (Joshua 3:10; 1 Samuel 17:26, 36). What I mean by this is that He has life in Himself. The idea of life in Himself is the idea that He is eternal and never dying. We do not have life in ourselves. We only have life in Him. So His being alive is not the same sense of being alive as we would say we are alive. He literally has life and is the only one who can give it to another. Why is this important? Because if you don’t believe this, you end up with a cosmic force like you see in Hinduism that has no life in and of itself. Interestingly enough, not only is this cosmic force where the idea of karma came from, but this is also the idea that Star Wars and the Force were based upon, at least in terms of the philosophy.

He is a Person

A person must be self-conscious and self-deterministic. This means they can think about who they are and are capable of making choices. So what is the basis for saying God is a person? He is both self-aware and self-deterministic. (Isaiah 45:5; Job 23:13; Acts 15:18; Deuteronomy 1:37) If you miss this, you easily stray into Deism, the belief that God wound up the universe like a clockmaker by one method or another and then let it run with no further intervention or interaction (or, in some individual’s beliefs, He only takes an interest in the really big things and has no concern for anything smaller). I should also note that Theistic evolutionists often are in reality Deists who believe evolution is the method God used to wind everything up. But in either case, not believing God is a person, but is instead just a cosmic force or spirit, leads to easily believe He would abandon His creation as an entity without personality has no sense of caring or concern for anything.

God Is Self-Existent

In Exodus 3:14, God states I AM that I AM. The power of this identification is significant because only God can truly say this. We cannot say I am that I am because it steps us outside of time. That statement, in its truest meaning, means that the individual saying it has always existed and always will. It leads to another aspect of God: His eternal nature. We can say that we are tired or we are ourselves, but we don’t have the capability to sustain ourselves, nor are we eternal. So, therefore, in making this statement, God is saying He is self-existent and outside of time.

God’s Immensity 

This is the concept that God the Father is so immense that He simultaneously fills time and the physical planes of Heaven and Earth. The support for this is found many places, but some of the key supporting passages are 1 Kings 8:27; 2 Chronicles 2:6; Jeremiah 23:24; and Isaiah 66:1. 

God’s Eternity

The concept of how God’s immensity fills time is encompassed in the word eternity. God exists in eternity: in and at all times. He not only exists outside of time as we know it, but He created time and what we use to measure it. Unlike us, however, He is so immense that He is able to fill all of time. 

Now why is this and time important? Because time is full of change. It’s an essential part of our lives, so much so that we know nothing different. Every one of us changes over our lifetimes, and the things around us are always changing. God is the only One who doesn’t change no matter how much time passes. This goes back to the concept of His eternal essence. Because He is outside of time, to Him, it is only, always, the here and now and He never changes.

Because change is everything to us and all we know, this is a hard concept for us to comprehend. But we absolutely must believe this about God because His claims to sovereignty and His very being as God demands it and relies upon His immensity and eternal being.

We find the support for this in Genesis 21:33, Isaiah 57:15, Hebrews 1:2 and 11:3, and John 1:3 among many other places.

His Sovereignty

So why does His sovereignty depend on His immensity and eternal essence? If God couldn’t exist simultaneously in all times, then He could miss something, not know something, or need to learn something new. He would be like us, and things could catch Him by surprise. He wouldn’t be able to have an overarching plan for time that would come to fruition no matter what anyone does. In short, He wouldn’t be sovereign, and He wouldn’t be God because being God means being sovereign, eternal, immense, and spirit.

This leads to further discussion, then, on human free will and choice. But I’ll leave that for another post. It isn’t the point of this post, though it is an interesting discussion and one well worth having. 

Conclusion

These essences of God are key to understanding who God is. These are the foundation for our understanding of God and for all doctrines we hold to. If they are not, then we easily stray off into heresies and misinterpretations of God and His Word. Every false religion or belief leads back to a flawed understanding of God or a complete denial of Him.

So this lesson, this study of God is absolutely essential if we are to know with any certainty why we believe what we do about God. Without the Bible and without these aspects of His nature, we could know nothing of God and could have no assurance of any eternal destination, any purpose in life, or any structure for morality or anything else. Some of these aspects of life relate more specifically to His attributes, which I’ll discuss next week, but in the end, this foundation is necessary if we’re going to understand His attributes, which are more commonly discussed.

Understanding the foundation and laying our doctrines on it is an unavoidable step if we want to build a life that is consistent with what God has said and who He is. Only when we are content with or ignorant of our flawed, inaccurate view of God will we be content to focus on the end result with no concern over understanding why we believe the end result is true.

Sunday Stories: Submission Vs Subjugation

Ariel Paiement

Introduction

Last time on this section of the blog, I talked about my best friend, L, and the lessons I’ve learned in my time as his friend. That story and what I learned about myself lead into today’s story well. This story and its lessons, however, are far harder to share. In fact, this might be the hardest post I’ve felt God leading me to write, at least to date. But while it’s hard to think about this chapter in my life, even nearly two years after it all happened, I strongly believe the story could help others like me avoid the heartache I went through. So, I will share it as best I can along with the lessons I learned through it.

My Standpoint and Defining Terms

I’ll start by stating a few things very clearly so no one’s unsure or confused about my standpoint or how I define terms. First, I believe every woman should submit to the man God has placed in authority over her and that she should obey so long as the command given doesn’t go against clear Biblical principles. Fighting words with many, many women, even in Christian circles, which is both saddening and disheartening. But, I believe this is because many of us haven’t been taught a right view of submission, nor have our men, which is why the application of this lesson will be directed both to the women in my audience and to the guys (more as a plea based on issues I’ve observed than anything). 

Defining Submission

But onto point two. I believe that submission varies vastly from subjugation. Because of that, we need to define terms here. Submission, as I define it and as I believe the Bible teaches it, is the choice of the individual to obey and place themselves under the care of an authority. It is something that both men and women do every day when they obey the laws, and it is something God commands women to do (Eph. 5:22-23) for their husbands as well as for children to do with their parents in the same chapter (though the word obey is used instead). Like it or not, women, that’s what the Bible says.

But our fundamental churches are teaching an unbalanced message on submission that barely touches on (or entirely ignores) the men’s responsibility in response to the women’s submission. Though no pastor would intend for the results of this unbalanced message to lead to abuse or harm of women, that is very often what occurs. Why? Because the men hearing the message assume that they are not only owed their wives’ submission but also the right to behave however they see fit toward their wives. Why would they assume differently if the focus is entirely on the woman’s responsibility to submit? It seems to the listener that the man has no dictates for how he ought to treat his wife, and this then leads to subjugation. It is an unintentional but very dangerous result of the one-sided, unbalanced teaching on the role of women and the role of men in the home.

Defining Subjugation

So, how do I define subjugation? It is when a woman obeys not by choice but out of fear of retribution and harm if she doesn’t. It is when anyone, really, is no longer making a willing choice to obey (which would be submission) and instead cooperates because the other person is stronger and may inflict emotional, mental, or physical harm if they don’t get their way. Submission ceases to be submission if it is not a willing choice and is instead coerced. At the point that someone must coerce another to obey, they, at the very least, are not on the receiving end of the other individual’s submission.  

It is very important that this definition includes the point that the obedience is won through either open or perceived threats of some sort of harm. A person may feel forced to obey or obey grudgingly (neither of which are submission) without being subjugated. So please understand that there is a point where a woman may not be submitting but is also not being subjugated or trampled down by her husband. That middle ground is still an issue, to my mind, but it isn’t an issue on the part of the man, at least. Subjugation is obvious, at least to others, because it robs an individual of freedom of thought, a voice or say in matters, and their choices on a broad scale.

Because of how I define subjugation, I view subjugation as a perversion of submission and something that should in no way be advocated. It is, even if subtle, abusive in my experience. It results in men treating women as though they are inferiors, not equals. While I believe strongly that there is a hierarchy of authority in the home based on the Bible, the Bible is also very clear about how men (both fathers and husbands) ought to treat the women and children in their care. Subjugation doesn’t follow that model at all, and in the case of marriage, it eliminates the aspect of partnership that the Bible promotes. In no way is abuse of a woman justified, nor is it excusable to try to wear her down mentally so that she will both obey without thought of her own and avoid ever voicing her opinion on matters that affect her. A man who wants to hurt the woman he should be caring for or rob her of the God-given ability to think for herself is a man unworthy of any woman whether she’s submitting to him or not.

Reasons for Submission and the Commands Surrounding It

Finally, before we talk about how I learned the difference between these two and what shaped my view of this important subject, I feel we need to discuss the commands the Bible gives to men and women regarding submission and authority in the home in general.

In Ephesians, where it tells women to submit to their husbands, it also tells husbands to love their wives. Some of us may wonder why that is. Let’s start with the husbands and why they need to be told to love their wives.

Why Different Commandments to Different Genders?

Simply put, because women and men are different. Like it or not, we think differently and have different aspects of our nature. In general, for example, women are more nurturing than men. And men, in general, don’t need to be told to take charge. It’s built in to their nature, and the only reason men today don’t do so is because modern feminism has taught them not to be men.

So why tell men to love? The men do not love their wives naturally. Sure, they might have the emotional type of love, but the sacrificial, agape love that Christ has for the church? That’s not something they naturally display, so they must then be told that’s how they should respond to their wives.

Women, generally, have an easier time with loving and nurturing, but they instead have difficulties with a fight between taking charge and knowing their place in the home. So, God wisely tells them, submit. That command helps us as women to understand the structure of authority in the home.

It isn’t saying we’re lesser beings or worth less than the man. It’s saying that the man is the authority in the house, and he must answer to God someday for all he allows and commands within that home. The woman’s place is not to usurp that God-given authority but to submit to it.

The Results?

If both individuals obey the commands given to them, then the woman submits without fear to a man who loves her, cherishes the gift she has given, and will sacrifice to ensure she has what she needs (even if not always what she wants). That is a marriage that can last! The marriage built on these principles is a happy one. The marriage that does not in some way act on these principles is much more tenuous, and in my experience, a much, much less happy one. I’ve seen both, and I can tell you that I don’t want the type of marriage that upends the order God has given to things. It isn’t pretty, and even if it isn’t absolutely awful, it certainly has more problems.

Learning to Differentiate

That last section was on the longer side, but a careful and clear defining of terms is necessary for any discussion that may be doctrinal or controversial in nature. Otherwise, misunderstandings or twisting of words may easily arise. But, moving on from that, let’s talk about how I learned the difference.

Growing up, the churches I was in talked about submission frequently, but their focus was only on the women. They rarely, if ever, spoke to the guys about their responsibility as the leaders in the home receiving the submission of their wives and children. They only mentioned it in any real way on Father’s Day, and once a year hardly teaches our men and boys that the subject matters in any way. 

The definition they presented for submission and the way they presented it always made me extremely uncomfortable and frustrated. If their idea of submission was all that was possible, or was what God promoted as good, then why should I want it? It didn’t seem good, and what they taught colored my understanding of God in this area to a less than flattering view. I thought for myself enough to recognize I wanted no part of that, but not enough, yet, to understand why or to search for answers on it. Since my views on the topic were cemented by the time my father got around to really teaching about it, I filtered everything he said through what I already thought. I didn’t understand the differences between what he believed and taught and what our church believed and taught. Not until I was in college.

Changes in Perspective

In college, I might have continued to hate the word and idea of submission as the church used it if not for L. After meeting my best friend, I realized it wasn’t as bad as I thought. At that point, I started looking at the idea of submission more closely as the Bible taught it, not as I was told the Bible did by the church. I was learning to apply my mind to this area too, not just other areas where I already held a different opinion from my church and had Scripture to back it up. I was learning to study and act on Scripture instead of simply reacting to what might or might not be false teaching. 

This led to the realization that we actually choose to submit all the time in our lives. We follow laws, and we often abide by unspoken societal rules. We choose to cooperate with government, usually, even when we might not be very happy with what they’ve chosen to do. Children submit when they obey their parents. Wives submit when they let their husband make decisions with a happy and willing spirit, even if the decision is as small as where they’ll go out to eat. In my case, I chose to give my best friend a lot of say in my life on matters big and small. I chose to defer to decisions he made unless doing so violated my moral beliefs. Others protested on occasion that I gave him too much control, but I was happy with the way things were. I didn’t feel as though he took advantage of it at all.

A Much-Needed Relief

In all honesty, L made it easy to leave the decision-making to him on things affecting us both as well as issues affecting only me. I barely even thought about what I was doing until later, most of the time. Granted, we both had lines and standards we felt were important and wouldn’t cross or break. But I don’t remember ever stopping to think, “Well, maybe I don’t want to do what you said to,” when he would tell me to go to bed because I wasn’t making sure I got enough sleep or when he would decide where we were going to eat. Sometimes, I had my own opinion or preference, but it became habit after a while to decide ahead that I’d go with what he wanted unless there was a reason to voice an opposing opinion.

I really appreciated that he took charge, and I found relief in letting someone else make the decisions. For years, I operated under the motto that I could do things myself and didn’t need any guy to do anything for me. I mean, I fussed about my brothers opening doors because I saw it as a commentary on my capability, not as a sign of respect toward me. I finally gave up control, and just as I’d started to feel grounded for once, L had to leave school.

Less than Bright Decision-Making

I’m not proud of what followed next. After L left, I felt lost. I grew accustomed to having someone there who loved me despite my flaws and who used the control I handed over to help me and to support me. I felt freer than I ever had in ages, and naturally, I missed that feeling. Besides that, I still wasn’t good at dealing with my depression alone. While he was there, L helped me tremendously, but I still didn’t fully know how to cope with the bouts I still had yet. So his departure was a huge blow. Going back to being alone and having that constant stress of always taking care of everything and making all the decisions by myself left me tense, lonely, and cut adrift.

So, when C stepped in, more than happy to take control and help, I was all too happy to let him. I met him before L left, and he and L were friends, so we spent a lot of time together. C wasn’t very controlling, at first. He didn’t offer any real structure in my life, but he did listen and encourage me, and he gave gentle nudges toward the right direction. He encouraged me to read my Bible and turn to God for encouragement, and he generally said all the right things.

Taking Things at Face Value

Since I was preoccupied, I took it at face value. I was so desperate to find someone who could help and bring back that sense of completion I’d felt previously that I didn’t notice the earliest warning signs and ignored my gut on the rest. When he pressed for a relationship, I admit I was unsure and scared. Those two words defined everything that was to follow.

Unable to find a logical reason for the bad feeling I had, I chalked it up to silly emotions—as I at the time prized logic over emotion to an unhealthy extreme—and moved ahead. Neither parent liked the relationship, but they wisely realized that I needed to learn my lesson somewhere safe, so my father didn’t stop me. The school rules protected me mostly in the physical arena, so they let the two of us proceed and prayed it wouldn’t end too miserably.

A Cruel Reality

Sadly, things went wrong faster than anyone expected, and it was worse than anticipated. C changed his tune as soon as we talked about dating, but it really changed when we were dating. He didn’t take no for an answer (unless there was just no way I would budge and he couldn’t get away with ignoring my wishes due to school policies), and he made every effort to assure me that being uncertain was no reason not to move forward or to cooperate. He guilt-tripped me from the start of the relationship by accusing me of stringing him along when I expressed doubts about moving forward so quickly. I was with him for a semester, and I saw firsthand what the difference was between submission and subjugation.

What I Expected From Prior Situations

My relationship with C was a nightmare and not at all what I’d hoped for. I guess in some ways, I was expecting him to respect me like L had. I trusted L implicitly. We had our issues, but I usually felt safe, loved, grounded, and sure of where we stood. At our worst, I sometimes felt unloved or unsure, but that was it. He genuinely apologized when he realized he had caused hurt or negative feelings. In turn, I quickly forgave wrongs or hurts because I knew he loved me, even if things in life sometimes caused him to treat me in a less than kind manner. 

Best of all, I knew where I stood with him. If I stepped over a line, L made it clear in no uncertain terms, and he told me what he would do if I did it again. But I always had a choice, and he never tried to push me into one or the other. He never threatened to cut off contact or shut me out if I didn’t do what he preferred with an issue. Instead, he just did what he could to mitigate the issue. He was there not for himself, but because he cared. He gave me his full support if I wanted to work on an issue he gently pointed out, and he made sure the relationship had a balance of give and take. I did my best to offer him the same: unconditional love, respect, and support no matter what.

What I Got With C

But with C, I was never able to fully trust him. I lied to myself and said I did, but looking back, I never did. I was constantly unsure where he and I stood. Consequences for stepping over lines were never clear. In fact, I rarely knew where the lines were until I crossed them, and then C would make me feel awful for even a small offense. I couldn’t ask questions about anything he felt we’d discussed enough, and I never knew when that might be because it changed for every topic. Talking to anyone but him about my doubts was the only consistently punished offense as it earned me accusations of distrust and censure for not believing him.

I gave him my respect, my heart, and what trust I could manage. He returned the gift I gave with disrespect, broken boundaries, and broken trust until it all fell apart. I should’ve left sooner than I did, I know. But even when he pushed me physically, emotionally, and mentally, I held on. 

Making Excuses

I wanted to believe in him, and I wasn’t able to come to terms with the changes in him. Frankly, I didn’t understand how he’d changed so much. I didn’t really think I could change him, mind you, but I kept hoping that if I waited it out, he’d go back to normal. I kept chalking the poor treatment—and the fights that erupted when I tried to say no or give an opinion—up to stress. He was just too tired or too worn out because of school, I told myself. Maybe this. Maybe that.

Finally, I faced the truth. He hadn’t changed. The person he let me see for the time before we started dating had been a lie. A lie that he wholeheartedly believed, I think, due to the very real psychological issues he had, but a lie, nonetheless. 

Consequences of a Bad Choice

He and I split at the end of the spring semester right before finals and just a few days before I turned twenty. My father asked him to leave me be until school ended for the summer. I needed to focus on school and was in no state to explain why I was ending it immediately. Frankly, I was a wreck. I barely managed to study for finals. Since we were both working on campus for the summer, I figured I could talk to him once I was done with finals so we could part ways amicably.

But he refused to leave me alone. He called my friends and brother (who was on campus with us) constantly because I wouldn’t answer, showed up at places he knew I usually went (to the point that I quit going to my usual spots unless I had to), and gave me a week or two tops to come to terms with things. He didn’t allow me to grieve or try to put the pieces back together, and he refused me the relief escaping him brought. 

A Living Nightmare

During the summer, my brother ran interference wherever he could. But that just made C angry and put my brother (and anyone who helped me or cared enough to support me) on the receiving end of his anger. Eventually, he began avoiding me like the plague. However, he still antagonized my brother, and at times, I was terrified he’d hurt the people I cared about. He treated anyone who supported me with accusations of distrust, and even his own brother, who had initially tried to continue including me in breakfasts Sunday, dealt with C’s anger. I lived my entire senior year in fear that I’d somehow set him off again and restart the whole waking nightmare. I was thrilled about graduation because it meant going home, far out of his reach. 

Friends and teachers started to notice that I withdrew from people, and I spent more and more time in my room to avoid any chance of running into him. But even with that, I couldn’t avoid running into C sometimes. Having classes on the same floor as he did made that impossible. We weren’t allowed in the hallways outside classrooms until five minutes before class, and so the open seating arenas on each floor were the only options for students to sit down or congregate. Those days, my teachers would ask if I was okay when I came into class. Even though he never spoke to me and usually avoided eye contact, just seeing him was enough to leave me trembling for the first five to ten minutes of class. 

At the End of the Day…

My situation was far worse than most regular breakups are. However, when you make bad decisions, even just one, and you involve yourself with someone like C, this is the kind of thing it leads to. My story is tame in comparison to what some women have gone through at the hands of guys like this. (I refuse to call them men because a real man knows how to treat a woman with love and respect.)

The Moral of the Story

This has been quite a long post, but I hope you’ll bear with me just a little longer. Let me level with the guys here first. I’m not going to tell you what you should or shouldn’t do because it’s not my place. But I’ll do my best to give a bit of perspective on this while highlighting what the Bible has to say about the issue. What you choose to do with it is your decision.

To the Guys:

Here’s the thing. I’ll be the last woman you will ever hear advocating that the women should be in charge instead of the men. That’s not Biblical, and frankly, we’ve seen just how well that’s worked so far. It hasn’t…  While every marriage is unique in how the couple handles submission, just as the people involved in that marriage are unique, Scripture is clear on one thing. Women should submit to their husbands. Even if you aren’t a good husband or authority figure. That doesn’t mean you can take advantage of it, though.

If you’re lucky enough to have a woman who genuinely wants you to lead and wants to submit to you, cherish that! Especially if she’s under no obligation to submit to you yet. The world is, at best, unable to understand their need or desire to submit to you and leave themselves in your care, and at worst ridicules them for a good desire. So, it takes a lot of strength to be honest with herself, let alone with you, about that need. Please don’t make her regret being transparent with you on this. You have a very special woman. Both she and her willingness to submit and heart to serve are a gift, whether you recognize it or not.

In the end, no fellow human being can tell you what to do with that gift. Only God and His Word can do that. But I can tell you the consequences if you don’t. If you are one of those guys who don’t or won’t treasure it, she will walk away when she’s able. And if she’s not strong enough to do it alone? Others will be happy to help her to do so. When she does leave, some other man will treat her like the treasure she is. He will pick up the broken pieces you created. He will be glad to show her that she is a treasure, even if it takes time because of the damage you’ve done.

To the Girls:

Ladies, if you grew up in a fundamental church, you’ve been hearing all about how women should submit to men. If you didn’t grow up in a fundamental church, you’ve probably been hearing the opposite. “Women shouldn’t have to submit to a man. We’re strong, independent women, so they have no right to tell us what to do.” Sound familiar? Regardless of what you grew up with, you’ve probably heard the world’s idea of a strong, independent woman both extolled and ridiculed.

I’ll be honest. I can’t stand today’s idea of a strong, independent woman as it’s presented. That said, some women buy into this but in practical life are actually very feminine, kind women. Their personalities aren’t the Type-A sort. So while they may agree with the idea, they’re not exactly the poster child for it either. All of us are different, and we all fit in differently. But I still really hate the ideal that’s presented to our girls and young women today.

Why I Can’t Stand It

The strongest of today’s feminists would tell you that being a strong, independent woman means you don’t submit to a man. Doing so is weak and is, in fact, allowing yourself to be subjugated. Instead, you must get a job and support yourself. And you find a man who will be somewhere in the range of total pushover and caring a little. Heaven forbid you marry a man who wants to be in charge of any areas of your life. Okay, I’m being a bit sarcastic. I don’t have any problem with women working or having a degree of independence. However, I have a big problem with what they have to say about submission. I also take issue with the fact that many mistake equality for having no difference at all in roles.

The Desire to Submit is Not a Bad Thing

Girls and young ladies out there, wanting to submit is not a bad thing! It’s actually a good and natural desire. Don’t let the rest of the world tell you otherwise. They’re wrong. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with being independent or strong. But their definition of a woman who is those things? It’s not the only one, and I would propose that it isn’t even the right one. A woman who submits even when she isn’t happy about a decision is much stronger than one who rebels. Trust me. I know. I’ve done things both ways. Submission is a choice that, though sometimes hard, is a lot more fulfilling than rebellion. 

The Desire to Submit Can Be Used Against You

But also know this. Your desire to submit can be used against you just as it was with me. Please, oh please, be careful who you give that kind of power to! Never give it to anyone who wants to take it without permission or right to it. If you get involved with a man like that—especially if you marry him—submission becomes much harder. It’s easy to shift into subjugation before you know what has happened. And once you’re involved, the road back to freedom and yourself is much, much harder. Wait for someone who will give as much as they’re taking. Wait for a man who recognizes your value and honors you for it. Men like that do exist. They’re not all bad. If you don’t wait for that man, you’ll do a lot of damage to yourself before you meet him. And it’ll be damage you can’t undo.

Conclusion

My greatest regret to this point is what happened with C. I lost a piece of me, and I’m never going to be the same. God’s grace brought me, step-by-step, to a place where I don’t look at every guy with suspicion. But unfortunately, what C did to me, what I allowed to happen, is not something I can get rid of. It changed me as a person. I learned a valuable lesson, but I can only look back on my choices with regret. My choice affected how I look at the world. It affected my ability to look at the guys around me the same way. Even if I get to a point where that’s no longer a problem, it’s still going to color my perspective. And so, it’s likely that things will be harder for the right one when he shows up.

Ladies, please don’t fall into that same trap. Learn from my mistakes. Don’t let guys with ill-intent turn your submission into a weapon to be used against you. Your submission is a gift you choose to give, so choose wisely. The choice you make will impact you for the rest of your life.

Sunday Stories: A Drastic Change

Ariel Paiement

Introduction

Today’s post will be a bit longer mainly because the time in my life I’m about to share with you was so significant and also stretched over a longer period. But I’ll do my best to keep things condensed as much as possible. Those of you who have been following this section of the blog probably remember that the first post in this newer section was about the lessons I learned from the situation with my Mom. You’ll probably remember that I had fallen into serious depression and addictive behavior patterns that created all kinds of issues.

My First Year in College

By the time I reached my first year in college, I was a mess. I’m sure that, to most, it looked like I had it all together. I doubt anyone would’ve looked at me and thought, that girl has serious trust issues, crippling depression, and addictive behavior patterns that will probably land her in a world of trouble. Of course, no one knew me well enough to see that. They may have known I was unhappy, if I let it show in public, but the closest anyone came to recognizing there was an issue was my mother, and that was only because we fought all the time.

By the time I got to college, my relationship with my mother was starting to mend but still tenuous, and I was harboring a massive load of resentment toward my dad for not being there for me when everything went wrong with my mom, but I didn’t even recognize that I resented him because I’d spent so long punishing myself and my mother, taking that resentment out on us both (but mostly on her) instead of the person I put on a pedestal and believed was too perfect to be blamed for anything.

None of us deserved anything that I’d been dishing out on us in that time. My father had done his best to be there for all of us while also being there for my mom and working. My mother tried her best after the fact to reconnect and give me back what I’d lost. And me? I was lost, drowning in the aftermath I didn’t know how to cope with and making it worse because I had zero self-confidence in facing my emotions.

I brought this with me to school, spending all but the last week or two of school without friends. No one stayed around for long, and in part, I think this was because I was searching for something no one around me at the time knew how to provide, something even I didn’t really know I was looking for or needed. 

The Beginnings of a Change

In the last two weeks of the semester, all of that changed. Not immediately, of course, but it started there and continued on from that point. The only person I’d managed to make any significant connection with (and the only person who cared enough to constantly introduce me to people) was an outgoing, sociable pastoral major. (I’ve chosen letters to represent the individuals I’m going to talk about to protect their privacy and identities.) Let’s call this guy D.

He introduced me to so many people during the few weeks at the beginning of our friendship that I’d begun to lose count. I was also fairly… Well, shy isn’t exactly the word. I was reserved and extremely cautious around guys due to some less than wonderful experiences during community college years. Nothing too bad, but just enough to make me distrusting and ill-inclined to let them get too close to start off. Which makes what happened at the end of that first semester even more startling.

I’ll never forget the night D asked me to meet him at the campus Sports Center to hang out and meet another friend of his (whom he said rarely left the dorms and was a double major in math and engineering). I don’t know what made me do it. Maybe it was that I was lonely and had nothing better to do. Maybe it was that I kind of liked D a bit at the time and thought any opportunity to see more sides of him was too good to pass up. My curiosity always has been what’s gotten me into the most trouble. Well, that and running my mouth too much. But whatever the reason, I agreed.

An Intriguing Individual

His friend was interesting. That’s the best way I can put it. I was more focused on the new guy I’d just met than I was on D, and I was also a lot more open than I usually was. We’d met to play a few games of checkers (it was the only game in the Sports Center that allowed for more than brief snatches of conversation between taking turns at a game or flying around the ice rink), and right away, D’s friend L made a point of letting me know he was just okay at checkers. I didn’t really believe him because, after all, it’s best not to underestimate an opponent, no matter what they say. Turns out that was a smart move. We played two games, each of us winning one, before we decided to head over to the commons area and just hang out to chat. 

By this time, I was really intrigued by L. He wasn’t what I expected (though, honestly, I have no clue what I was expecting…), and he had this way of seeing through people. The most interesting thing was watching as he and D took turns analyzing each other. They took the time to go through everything from how they knew what mood the other person was in to what they’d figured out about the person just based on their observations.

Then they drew me in. I didn’t know either of them well, and I’d only just met L, so an hour or two wasn’t much time to use to analyze. Lucky for me, I was bothering to pay attention because they’d grabbed my attention. So, I got involved in the conversation and offered them what I knew. The rest of the night passed in a bit of a blur, but by the time curfew rolled around, I was more comfortable with L than anyone else I’d met and known for weeks.

An Unexpected Question and an Unexpected Friend

The thing that really did it, though, was the question. He waited for D and another friend who had joined us in the Commons area to go before asking, something I didn’t think much about at the time but very much appreciated later. Then he asked me: Why do you always wear a mask? 

I remember standing there, my heart pounding. I wasn’t expecting the question, and not even friends I’d had for months ever asked that. Whether because they didn’t see it or because they felt it would be rude to ask, I don’t know. But L asked it as if it was the most natural question to ask a person you’d known for just a few hours.

I considered trying to regain the upper hand in the conversation by refusing to answer. It wasn’t long until curfew, so if I’d refused to answer, I could’ve bowed out politely. But I didn’t. I don’t know if he even noticed the pause or the internal struggle, but I calmed down not long after and just answered him. I actually felt relieved. When the first moment of fear and surprise passed, I didn’t feel anything except relief and, for some reason, a sense that I could trust him with the answer.

That night, if I’d refused to answer, I don’t know where our friendship would be. Maybe he would’ve decided it wasn’t worth trying to figure out what was wrong and why I spent my time hiding from everyone. Or, maybe the fact that I wouldn’t say would’ve made it him that much more curious. Either way, that night was the start of more than I ever would’ve imagined.

Gifts I Didn’t Know I wanted

After that, we spent a lot of time together. He was determined to help me face what I didn’t want to look at, and he was determined to engage me intellectually. I enjoyed the talks. Our earlier conversations were difficult because he was still learning how to approach me, how to handle the situation. But he kept trying, and while it took me some time (and some prodding from family and friends when his approach was doing more harm than good) to learn to communicate what I needed and what I didn’t like, we figured it out. The two of us become extremely close, and by God’s grace, I believe, he brought me out of the darkness I was living in and helped me to both find the light and understand myself better.

He gave me some of the greatest gifts I’d received in a very long time: a listening ear, unconditional love and acceptance, and the ability to feel safe not being in control. Those days we spent together at school were some of the brightest moments in my life despite the pain I sometimes had to face. But he was there with me every step of the way, offering his strength when I didn’t have any, giving his insight when I couldn’t understand the things I felt, and then letting go when he saw I was able to walk on my own. When I regained my footing, I was able to also offer him support and acceptance when he struggled, and the relationship became stronger for it. He was the protective older brother I’d never had and hadn’t ever admitted I wanted.

Refining Fire

As beautiful as those days were, what really made our relationship what it is today was the hardship that it went through. We parted ways at the end of spring semester after knowing each other for only a semester and a few weeks, and both us went home. We called and Skyped over the summer, but toward the end, something changed, and we talked less often. When I got back to school, more than a little had changed.

He was distant. When we’d parted, the two of us were so close that we were hardly ever apart. But when I came back, it felt as if some part of him had left. I did everything I could think of to fix it. I’m afraid I made it worse instead of better.

Neither of us did a good job of communicating the issue, and matters were only made worse by the fact that one or two of our close friends had begun to nag about whether or not we were an item. We weren’t, but some of those friends began to tell L that I was lying about how I really felt. Things between us got so bad that, if a mutual friend hadn’t intervened, we might’ve lost our friendship entirely. I didn’t want it, but my attempts to bridge the gap and fix things made him feel suffocated and pushed him away. 

He left that semester, right after we reconciled, and he never came back to school. For a while, we didn’t talk, and during the time that we weren’t really in touch while he was in boot camp and I busy with school, I got involved with a mutual friend. In all honesty, I felt lost after he left. He had helped me to embrace my emotions, my past, and the part of me that felt most content when someone else I trusted took control so I could just be me. With that gone, I didn’t know how to cope. The only person I felt comfortable sharing anything at all with was gone, and in my desperation to find solid ground again, I made some very foolish decisions. But those decisions and what they led to are a conversation for another day.

Reconnecting

We did reconnect the summer after he left right before school began, and it felt as if no time at all had passed. Both of us had things we were dealing with. He had new adjustments in life. I was navigating a messy breakup that had left me feeling more lost and terrified than ever. But God brought both of us through it. He and I got to talk each other through some of the tail end of those changes and difficulties, just as we’d done so often in previous difficulties.

But the distance and the struggles both were helpful. They prepared me to handle the breakup, at least in avoiding becoming bitter over how I was treated. I’d already learned how to deal with emotional pain inflicted, albeit by accident, by someone I loved. So when my ex inflicted it because he only cared about what he wanted, I navigated that without becoming angry or bitter. (It wasn’t much help when it came to watching my ex hurt mutual friends too, but something’s better than nothing!)

I learned so many things from this relationship, and I continue to learn things. I learned how to love someone with no regard for myself, how to communicate, that it was safe not to be in control so long as the person who had it was trustworthy, and so much more. L taught me so much about myself, about the world around me, about people, and about helping others.

The Most Important Things I’ve Learned

At one point, L told me that he felt I no longer needed him during that time of difficulty. He couldn’t understand why I would want him to stay back then. I don’t know if he understands it now. But however illogical it might have seemed, he at least accepts that I wanted him to stay. Sometimes, we have to remember that not everything in life makes logical sense. It would be nice if it did, but it doesn’t.

Our friendship has lasted four years so far, longer than any friendship I’ve had since I was a child. I don’t know where God will take us both next, but I do know this. We’ve learned a lot from each other and will continue to learn if the friendship continues on.

But the most important lesson I learned? God never brings anyone into our lives by mistake. Every relationship has its share of problems and struggles, but when God brings a person into your life, it’s always for a reason, and there’s always something you can learn. Never take for granted the people who love you or what they have to teach you. Conversely, never take lightly those who bring difficulty into life. They’re also there for a reason, and sometimes, even though they may bring pain, that pain is exactly what you need to grow and to heal. 

Sunday Stories: Calm In The Storm

Ariel Paiement

Introduction

With everything going on due to the Coronavirus, there has been yet another opportunity for me to learn to trust God. It’s a stressful time for most people, and I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t stressed at all. While I’m not particularly worried about my job security like some are right now, I’m adjusting to a new situation in life. For the first time in years, everyone is home. It’s not just me, my parents, and a few of my younger siblings. It’s all eight of us, and that hasn’t been the case since I was eighteen and graduated from high school. 

It might not seem like that much to complain about considering what everyone else is dealing with, and admittedly, it’s not. But with everyone home, tempers run high, and people get stressed. Working from home, while it has its perks, isn’t as wonderful when you have everyone at home making noise or interrupting you to do things during work hours. And in all of that, there’s the temptation to lash out, get angry, and lose it on the people around you, especially when you can’t go anywhere.

Learning to Trust in the Storm

I’m not the most patient person in the world, so this has definitely been a learning situation and a trust situation to boot. I’m having to learn to trust that God can help me stay calm and patient with people around me. Those who know me more personally know that along with not being very patient, I also am not very trusting. I struggle with trusting people, and I struggle with trusting God. While I’ve learned to trust Him on some things, it’s an ongoing process with each new thing, it seems like. (Apparently, I’m not a very fast learner or the concept is just not quite computing.)

But, as difficult as it can be, I appreciate the opportunities to learn to trust. Maybe not at the exact moment I’m being tested, but afterwards, I do. A few months ago, it was trusting God while I was looking for a job. I determined that I wasn’t going to stress about it because stressing meant I wasn’t trusting God. I also determined that, aside from those family members who already knew and were praying for me, I wasn’t going to ask for prayer. Probably sounds a bit weird, but in my head, I needed to go through the struggle alone. It wasn’t something that I felt I should share because it felt like it was between me and God. I needed to go to Him on my own without relying on others’ prayers for me. Normally, I wouldn’t do that with something. I’m all for asking for prayer when I’m struggling through something hard, but that was one learning experience I just felt needed to happen alone. 

And God got me through it. He helped me to grow, and He showed me that there wasn’t a need to worry. That was the least stressful job hunt I have ever gone through even though I only ever heard back from one company on an interview months after I started looking.

Now I’m in another situation to learn to trust God. To trust Him to provide, aid, and bolster. Being stuck at home every day with no ability to leave unless I absolutely have to in order to get meds or shop makes me feel claustrophobic and trapped. It would be easy for me to get worried, frazzled, and scared like so many people have. It would be easy to look at everything going on around me and wonder what I’m supposed to do with everything going to pieces around me.

Instead, I’ve chosen something else. I’ve chosen to trust God. To believe that He will get me through this and help me to respond in a way that honors and glorifies Him in spite of what’s going on. I have chosen to remember the God that I serve and who He is.

Psalm 46 – A Very Present Help In Trouble

The Scripture that has been most on my mind of late has been Psalm 46. I learned this through a song by Judy Rogers called Refuge. (If you’ve never heard it, you should go listen to it. It’s a perfect reminder for the times we’re living in, in my opinion.) I’ve put the Psalm below (KJV version), and I’ll explain why it’s been such a help during this time of storm in a moment.

God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.

Therefore, will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea.

Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof. Selah.

There is a river, the streams whereof shall make glad the city of God, the holy place of the tabernacles of the most High.

God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved; God shall help her, and that right early. 

The heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved; he uttered his voice, the earth melted.

The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah.

Come, behold the works of the Lord, what desolations he hath made in the earth. 

He maketh wars to cease unto the end of the earth; he breaketh the bow, and cutteth the spear in sunder; he burneth the chariot in the fire.

Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.

The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge. Selah.

Why Look to These Verses?

These verses have been an amazing comfort to me because they remind me of a few things about God. First and foremost, He is in control. He could stop the virus, but He has chosen not to. Granted, I wouldn’t say the virus itself is a good thing, but God has already been using it for good. In China, there are already stories of how local and government authorities have received the word of God from Christians they would ordinarily persecute because those Christians were willing to serve God and risk their own lives to help others. We don’t see that in America and, in fact, the prevailing attitude among many Christians I’ve seen talking on Facebook posts has been that we need to take care of the temple God has given us.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t, but ultimately, if God is glorified by us being tortured, persecuted, killed, or getting sick and dying helping others, then we are actually a hindrance to His work and His glory by trying to take care of ourselves. So often, that is an excuse to allow fear in situations like this to keep us from doing what we know God would want us to do. Obviously, right now, many of us are in states with shelter in place regulations. We can’t go out on the streets to pass out Bibles and face masks like the Chinese Christians did, and if we were to disobey our local authorities in this matter, it wouldn’t be very God honoring. Not to mention there would be very little point in doing so because who would be around to see it in many cases? But the point is that many of us in America are so wracked by fear and a me-first mentality that we can’t even fathom the idea of risking life and limb to trust God and do what He asks even if it’s dangerous.

So the first thing I see is that God is in control and is using this for His glory. Just as it says in the tenth line of the Psalm, Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth. He is doing just that. He is exalting His name through this virus in spite of the fear and the attitude of distrust many Christians in many countries, including our own, have displayed. That alone should be a comfort because we know that even what others view as evil can be turned for good in an amazing, miraculous way.

But the second thing I see from this is that we have an amazing God who is our refuge and our strength. I don’t need to be afraid because He is in control and He is my refuge. No matter what happens–even if I get sick and die–He is working everything out for His glory and my good. Ultimately, if my death brings Him glory, who am I to argue? I am given the greatest gift I could be given in that moment because I am dying to give Him the glory and I know I’ll go to be with Him. Paul says in Philippians 1:20-21 “According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”

It is an honor and a privilege to live for Christ and nothing but gain to die for Him too. So if I know He is in control, that even death is a gain, and that He is my refuge, why would I fear? Why wouldn’t I trust? Sometimes, I look at myself and am amazed that I have such an easy time trusting on the big things and such a hard time with smaller things. But I’m human, and that’s one of my particular shortcomings. Nonetheless, I’m grateful for His calling and His faithfulness to work in me the good work He chose to begin. And in this area of trust, He continues to give me chances to grow.

Struggling with Trust

Maybe you’re also struggling with trust. Maybe you look around you and see everyone panicking, and you too feel a little twinge of fear, an urge to take things beyond what is wise or full of temperance and moderation. It’s easy to see everyone else freaking out and feel like we should too, isn’t it? But if you’re in Christ, if you know Him as your Master and your Savior, you too can hold onto the promises made throughout Scripture. You can say along with Paul that to live is Christ and to die is gain. You can hold onto the promise in 2 Timothy 1:7 where Paul writes to Timothy that “God hath not given us a spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.”

Take it from your own experience and from someone else who has been in plenty of storms where she chose not to trust God. It’s so much better to let Him have control. In the end, He does whether you admit it or not. The only thing you do by trying to wrest it from His grasp is stress yourself out, scare yourself, and add additional pressure into your life that doesn’t need to be there. If you’re doing this, trust me, you’re not alone. I’ve done it. I’m very prone to doing it. But if I can learn to let Him take charge without being afraid and stressed out, so can you. 

The takeaway today is this. If you’re His child today and you’re stressing out or scared about what might happen due to the current world events or what has already happened because of this virus, stop. Take a deep breath and go to Him with your fears and concerns. You may have something He wants you to do, but I can guarantee that if you don’t stop and pray first, you are going to take on a whole lot of things He doesn’t want you to do, and you may even miss doing what He does want you doing. 

So pray. Ask Him to take away your fear and replace it with His peace that passes all understanding. Let Him in. He cares for you, and even when things are hard, He wants to work in your life and will work things out for your good whether you understand how it’s to your good or not. Trust Him. He knows more than you ever could. As the Psalm I quoted here said, He is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. That hasn’t changed. It never will. And so, you are able to also say you don’t fear even if the earth is destroyed, the mountains thrown into the sea, and the waters roar and are troubled.