Truth Magazine

By Hiram Hutto

To trace the development of the word from which we discuss worldliness (kosmos) is an interesting, if somewhat disappointing, exercise. Initially it meant an ornament, then the ordered or beautiful arrangement of the universe, next the earth, then the inhabitants of the earth – most of whom are bad, and thus finally the evil that characterizes the world. It started out beautiful and attractive, but ends up bad and ugly. Most sin is that way. It can take something good and lovely and misuse it so that the result is evil. And this is doubly demonstrated in the title of this article. Doubly, because it takes something good and misuses it; but then to compound the tragedy, the bad is endorsed and becomes respectable so that something evil is portrayed as something good! “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil” (Isa. 5:20). But perhaps you wonder: Just what is respectable worldliness?”

Let it be noted to begin with, by respectable worldliness I do not mean that such is respectable with God. The very concept behind worldliness eliminates any idea of God’s approval of it. John tells us that it “is not of the Father” (1 John 2:16), and James says, “friendship with the world is enmity with God” (James 4:4).

Just as goodness stems from the good, and kindness from the kind, so worldliness stems from the world (“the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life,” 1 Jn. 2:16). It has both its origin and fruition in the kind of thinking and/or action which springs from such considerations. Fundamentally, worldliness is an emphasizing (Which often runs to obsession) of that which is temporal, material, physical (which frequently involves the sensual) at the expense of (and more often than not, to the exclusion of) that which is spiritual. It is the opposite of spirituality. Clearly this can involve “a multitude of sins.” As a rule, however, worldliness is thought of in terms of that which is either immoral or tends to immorality, and, to be sure, there are many worldly people who hate both God and all who would live godly. Yet there are many others to whom immorality is abhorrent, who nonetheless have little or no interest in God or spiritual things; who emphasize the material, the physical at the expense of, and all to frequently, to the exclusion of, the spiritual. All such are worldly. They “mind earthly things.” And they do this, not only in their own lives, but so uphold it, exalt it, and encourage it, that such have come to the looked upon by most people as not only not degrading, but positively desirable, respectable.

By respectable worldliness, then, I do not mean the immoral, the vulgar, the sensual, but rather that which the world considers respectable, and this in areas that in themselves are honorable, noble, and upright. This has had its influence on the church. For example, I do not preach to many people who are murderers or bank robbers. I would like to think that most assemblies to whom I preach are not characterized by too many adulterers (and one would be too many to be a part of the people of God) or drunkards. And chances are good that most in these audiences would find such repugnant. Yet they have been so affected by the world’s standard of respectability that many are guilty or respectable worldliness, and without some intense vigilance, many more will be. Let me illustrate.

An industrious brother (concerned about the high cost of living, the needs of his family, the requisites of a good education for them) takes a second job. This he does, knowing when he does it that rt will entail his being unable to assemble with the saints as the word of God teaches, and if not that, surely knowing that it will preclude his being available for any significant amount of his individual responsibilities in the church.

As the world looks on this type of individual, he has many respectable qualities. He is concerned about his family’s financial welfare and future. He is no leech on society. He wants to provide for his own, and even the Bible endorses this (1 Tim. 5:8). But he attains one lesser goal at the expense of a more important one. The one he attains may be good, noble, and respectable, but it is “worldly” nevertheless, because it emphasizes the physical and material at the expense of the spiritual. And certainly he has not sought “first the kingdom of God and his righteousness” (Matt. 6:33).

And what shall I say about working mothers? First of all, I want to say, because the Bible shows, they do right to work! But the word of God also tells them where to work. It does not say, “good secretaries, excellent clerks, workers in factories.” It says, “workers at home, keepers at home” (Titus 2:5).1 Tim. 5:15 shows there is more to this than sweeping floors and washing the dishes. It says, “guide the home.” This is a spiritual endeavor, and to “farm it out” so as to increase income for things, is to exchange the spiritual for the material. How depressing that people no longer believe that the hand that rocks the cradle is the hand that rules the world. What a tragedy that Christian mothers have allowed themselves to be cheated out of one of the noblest of tasks by having the false idea foisted upon them that they cannot be “fulfilled” unless they get out of the house and into the business world. So successfully (respectable) has this been done that 16 million USA mothers with children under 18 work outside the home. Forty per cent (40%) of the women who have children under 6 years of age leave them with somebody else while they go off to work. What is it that prompts such? Will it help them participate more in “church work”? Will it increase their opportunities to visit the sick, to attend Bible classes, and do many other activities in the Lord’s work? I do not recall ever hearing anyone say, “I think leaving my children to someone else will help them and me grow spiritually.” Quite a few just “took the job temporarily, till we get these unusual expenses paid.” (And these turn out to be about as temporary as taxes!) I visit in some of these homes, and from what I observe, they certainly could not be said to be in any kind of dire financial circumstances. Most of them are in financial circumstances as good as most and better than many. Was it spiritual reasons that demanded they so do? And consider this:

1. The training of children is not the responsibility of the government. It is not the responsibility of the grandparents, and not the responsibility of baby sitters. It is the responsibility of fathers (Eph. 6:4) and mothers (1 Tim. 5:14). It is a spiritual activity and no part-time job.

2. Who is going to be the source of “influence” on that child while its mother is away at work? Who will nurse it when it cries, kill its bruised knees, warn it against the dangers that lie ahead? Does the nursery really care about the kind of TV being watched?

3. Frequently such arrangements allow the child to spend most of its waking hours with someone other that its mother. I have even known children who called the “sitter” mother, but would not call the mother, “mother.”

4. It is an open secret that many, many wives are too tired after a “hard day at the office” to be the spiritual influence and companion that she needs to be.

5. We will not discuss the resentment, the temptations, etc. that come her way. But for two excellent lessons dealing with this entire subject, see one by Horace Huggins, and another by James Cope in the 1979 Florida College Lecture Book.

If this results in the emphasis on the material at the expense of the spiritual (and the evidence seems overwhelming), it is worldliness. The world may “respect” it but it does not change it.

Free Time

Vacations exert a wholesome influence. They can refresh the individual and stimulate a renewed vigor in the return to normal activity, and I believe such can be justified by the scriptures. But Christians can never take a vacation from God! This is true whether it involves a two-week vacation or simply a weekend at the lake. But there are many members of the church who abuse such blessings and during these times emphasize the material and physical at the expense of the spiritual, and that’s worldliness. The spiritually minded person does nothing but that he first considers it in the light of how it will fit in with the will of God for his life. Of primary importance is: Will this allow me to discharge my obligation and enjoy the privileges of being a child of God?

1. What shall I do? There are many things that the world calls respectable that a child of God cannot engage in because he has a different standard. Since other articles in this issue will probably deal with this, I forego a discussion of these here.

2. Where shall I go? Those who are concerned about this world will consider the scenery, the entertainment (and there is plenty of this that is respectable), but the spiritually minded person, while he can enjoy the scenery and the respectable entertainment, is primarily concerned with such things as: Will it be where I can worship with God’s people while I am away from home? Far too many members of the church wait till Saturday or Sunday morning, if then, to “look for a Church of Christ.” The spiritually minded did that before he left home. I am thrilled that I know a teenager who toured the western states with a foreign friend, but before beginning, wrote various congregations along the route to insure attendance at church services would be possible. And I cannot emphasize it too strongly; a Christian ought to have the same convictions away from home that he has at home! If he cannot conscientiously worship with a liberal congregation at home, he ought not to worship with one away from home. Just having up a sign that says “Church of Christ” is not enough. A Christian wants the vacation, but not at the expense of spiritual considerations.

There are members who get so involved in civic affairs, all of which may be perfectly good and wholesome (respectable), but they can become so involved in them, that some even miss the services to attend to such. And I am delighted that I know others who let it be known to begin with that, with them, God comes first and they will engage in nothing at any time that interferes.

Marriage

Perhaps the problem that eventually led to the flood was begun when the children of God began to be more concerned with the physical beauty (“fair”) than they were with spiritual qualities (Gen. 6:1-2). When a person takes only the materialistic and physical into consideration in choosing a wife or husband, he is making a grave mistake. These may be respectable considerations, but they are too often at the expense of the spiritual. Is she attractive? Does he have a good paying job? (And this does not mean that you must try to find the ugliest one around, nor one who is “on welfare.” Ugliness is no guarantee of spirituality, and laziness is certainly no virtue.) The thing that really matters is the spiritual. Is he a faithful Christian (not merely, “Is he a member of the church?”) Will she help me in the rearing of our children to be Christians? What are his/her spiritual qualities? Is he actively engaged in the Lord’s work? Companions may be respectable in the eyes of the world by the world’s standards (she is beautiful; he is successful), but what about in the eyes of God?

These are but a few of the many areas that demonstrate the need to be concerned about “respectable worldliness.” Those involved in it usually bear very little, if any, fruit for God, but like those sown on the thorny ground, “the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and . . . become unfruitful “(Mk. 4:19)

Attitudes That Prompt Worldliness

1. An erroneous evaluation of life. It says things “here and now.” Iii so doing it turns the world upside down. It puts the world on top and the kingdom somewhere below that. It says, “I will seek the physical and the material, and then I will add the kingdom of God later.”

a. Things come first. Yet Jesus said, “A man’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things which he possesses” (Luke 12:15). Respectable worldliness contradicts this.

b. Time. It says, “Later.” The Bible says, “Boast not thyself of tomorrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth” (Prov. 27:1). Respectable worldliness fails to properly evaluate life.

2. Satisfaction With Mere Membership. No need is felt to supply something for the edifying of the body (Eph. 4:16).

3. Indifference To Individual Growth and Development.

The admonition of Peter to `grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18) is not appreciated. All such will remain a spiritual dwarf or baby.

4. A “Free-Loader” and a Sponge. “Let George do it” attitude.

5. Nearsighted. “. . . Seeing only the things that are near” in this world, such are mindful of this world, rather than seeking the one that is to come (See Heb. 11:14-15 for the proper evaluation).

What Is The Remedy For Respectable Worldliness?

1. Recognize the danger. In fact, in some ways it is even more dangerous than the immoral and the ungodliness. This will indeed sap the very vitality from a person’s spiritual well being, but it does not look all that bad. One of its most fearful dangers is in its subtlety. It stems from what appears to be respectable motives; so many others are engaged in it, etc.

2. Look at things through the eyes of God. Before beginning any activity, ask: What will this do with my relationship with God? Would I want to appear before God right now? Will it allow me, yea even encourage, my wholehearted participation in all phases of His work, both in the church and as an individual Christian?

3. Seek transformation rather than conformation. Never be content to be as the world is, or as it approves. Remember, “God does not see as man seeth” (1 Sam. 16:7) and His ways are higher than man’s ways (Is. 55:8-9). “And be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Rom. 12:2).

4. Get involved in the work of the church.

5. Seek the association of other Christians. Perhaps it would be better to seek it among these who are somewhat ahead of us in spiritual development. If you want to be a better tennis player, play with someone a little better than you are. If you want to develop spiritually, be with those who are a little more spiritually advanced than you are.

Consequences of Respectable Worldliness

1. God is robbed. Anytime we do not give God that which is rightfully His, we are robbing God. Since we are to “seek ye first his kingdom and his righteousness” Matt. 6:33), to put anything else first (and that is exactly what respectable worldliness does) is to rob Him of what belongs to Him.

2. The church is robbed. If you do not share in the work and function of the congregation, it is being deprived of one more talent and time.

3. The individual is robbed. He is robbed of spiritual development. He is robbed of true peace of mind. He is robbed of the contribution of that most valuable possession, himself. And worst of all, he may be robbed of his soul in heaven for “the world passeth away and the lusts thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever”‘ (1 John 2:17).

QUESTIONS

1. What is worldliness?
2. Is respectable worldliness different from other kinds of worldliness in degree but not in kind?
3. What are some reasons that prompt respectable worldliness?
4. List some of the results of respectable worldliness other than those listed herein.
5. Give some specific illustrations other than ones in this article and explain why they are “worldly.”
6. How may a person avoid this sin? Be specific.
7. What quality of being a Christian is the opposite, explain why it is opposite, and list some ways to cultivate this.
8. Give some Bible examples of people who were guilty of respectable worldliness and tell wherein their worldliness lay.
9. Give some Bible examples of people who had opportunity to practice respectable worldliness, but did not.
10. Do you see any symptoms in your life that may indicate a yielding to respectable worldliness.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 21, pp. 346-349
May 24, 1979

By Earl E. Robertson

Every Christian should be deeply interested in the constant struggle between holiness and unholiness, godliness and ungodliness, sacredness and profanity. Perhaps, it is in this very sphere that many of us take for granted that we stand acceptable with God, but actually, are profane in person and action. Let us be concerned with what the word of God says about this grave issue.

Definition

Perhaps there has been a very limited idea or use made in our understanding of what profanity means. To hear the use made of this word one would think its only use is in our language. Certainly, sacred and holy things can be profaned in our speech; so also can the God who made us. Our word “profane” translates the Greek bebalos which “denotes a. the place which may be entered by anyone . . . . accessible” (Kittel, Vol. 1, p. 604). He shows it corresponds to the Latin profanus, and further acquires the sense of what may ” e said publicly in contrast to what must not be uttered on religious grounds.” This term occurs five times in the New Testament: three times to things (1 Tim. 4:7; 6:20; 2 Tim. 2:16), and two times to persons (1 Tim. 1:9; Heb. 12:16). Of the instances where it is used of material things Kittel says the word “refers to Gnostic teachings which are scornfully described as profane and unholy.” He further declares, “In opposition to their claim to offer an inward truth of religion inaccessible to others, the Gnostic statements concerning God are actually seen to be outside the sphere of the holy God and His Gospel.” Bauer says, “accessible to everyone, profane, unhallowed, in NT not in a ritualistic sense . . . but as an ethical and religious term” (p. 138). McClintock and Strong say, “To profane is to put holy things to vile or common uses; as the money changers did the Temple, by converting a part of it into a place of business (Matt. 21:12)” (Vol. 8, p. 626). Vine says, “Primarily, permitted to be trodden, accessible (from baino, to go, whence belos, a threshold), hence, unhallowed, profane . . . .” Harrison says, “In the OT ‘profane’ is a ceremonial word, an antonym of `holy’ (cf. 1 Sam. 21:4; Ezek. 22:26). To profane is to take something out of the sacred sphere into normal life. The Hebrew hll, whose original force was apparently to untie, means the removal of a prohibition, either illegitimately as in Lev. 21:4, 9, 15 etc., where prohibitions are imposed upon priests, or legitimately, e,g in Deut. 20:6 and Jer. 31:5, where hll signifies permission to use or enjoy the vineyard is no longer holy but profane or common, i.e., usable by man.

“The Lord’s name (i.e., person) is the most common object of profanity (Lev. 18:21; 20:3; 21:6; Ezek. 36:21-23; Amos 2:7, etc..); but what God has sanctified by His presence or His word may also be profaned, e.g., the sanctuary with its vessels (Lev. 21:12; 22:15; Ezek. 22:26; 24:21), the Sabbath (Ezek. 22:8, and the covenant (Mal. 2:10).”

Conditions Of The Profaned

So both persons and things can be profaned. It seems that one renders his state or condition profane when he forgets his separateness and exclusiveness for the Lord by being of common use. The world has common access to that one’s life and interests. While the Lord commands “love not the world,” the world is able to do with him what it wishes. This takes on every shade of love, interest, and influence of a worldly nature manifested by the one upon whom the world so easily can touch. One has to lower his standard, the standard God has given, to accept and use the common in morals and spirituality while God demands exclusive use. In fact, Paul emphasizes the fact that any “things that is contrary to sound doctrine” (1 Tim. 1:9,10) fits into the condition of a profaned person. When one becomes such a sinner he does so willingly; he permits himself to be trodden down through the abandonment of the sacred panoply furnished by the Lord.

Christians need to remember that we are not our own, that we have been bought with the blood of Christ and, therefore, have the sacred duty to glorify God in our body and spirit (1 Cor. 6:19,20; 2 Cor. 7:1). We need to keep our hearts with diligence (Prov. 4:23), and keep them pure (Matt. 5:8; 1 Pet. 1:22). Having pure hearts and a watchful desire that they remain that way keeps the world at its distance. But once the world has easy access to our heart we become profane, and this leads to actions of profanity. There is no way to escape this conclusion. There must always be an awareness in our heart that we belong to God and are sanctified, and that this condition must be reflected in our actions. We owe the world no kindnesses, but we owe God our very selves. When the world calls, we must be sufficiently alert to oppose that beckon (James 4:7), and when God calls our disposition and alertness should be like that of Samuel: “Here am I” (1 Sam. 3:4). It is so much easier to retain the right separateness from the world when one wants to do the right thing . . . to be ready unto every good work (Tit. 3:1). The world is always watching for the Christian to develop the attitude which will compromise. It makes no difference to the world what the area of profanity is just so it can have common access to our hearts and lives – that is its objective. The world has succeeded when its path to our hearts is open and unopposed! There is a coarseness essentially attendant with profanity that the alert Christian observes and detests; he shuns it knowing its power is despotic.

Fruits Of Profanity

The state of profanity is always producing the fruits of profanity. This is a law which can not be changed. Few, however, appear to be very aware of it. “A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things” (Matt. 12:35). A profane person, a person who has allowed himself to be trodden by evil . . . has become accessible by evil, produces the fruit of this kind of living. The sacred things of God with which this one’s life has to do will be misused and prostituted. It causes troubles and divisions within churches. He either profanes the sacred services by the introduction of unauthorized actions or he condones and aids others who do in his compromises. The sacred worship to God has been made profane by many through the introduction of mechanical instruments into that worship; the sacred work of evangelism likewise has been prostituted and profaned in the efforts of missionary societies and centralization of congregations acting to convert the world. Satan has been successful in making a path to our heart and has, therefore, been able to cause an abuse of holy and sacred things. The pure and holy are no longer such; they have been profaned through common use.

Think of our speech! The word of God demands, “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers” (Eph. 4:29). God forbids the Christian to use words that are corrupt, but to use words that are good. Rotten, putrid, worthless, are words for corrupt. While the Christian can speak words that are useful and helpful, often he speaks rotten words which spoil those about him or his words vex them like Lot of old. The Christian should be interested in “sound speech,” in speech that helps others and makes himself influential and useful in the cause of righteousness. People should be upset when they hear a so-called Christian speaking words of jest and filth! Peter says that Lot was sore distressed by the lascivious life of the wicked; this included their speech! Lot not only saw their ungodly behavior, he heard (2 Pet. 2:8)! The growing Christian today will also be vexed by the filth he hears. Yes, the filth one hears on TV, at work and play, and every place. We can control most of this. If we allow such access it will not be long until we too will be talking the same way.

Impure and vain speech is definitely a fruit of a profaned person. Any person using speech that does not befit the truth of the gospel is a disgrace to the Lord. Such an one seeking to be called a Christian, while allowing Satan the control of his brains and mouth, should be so ashamed that he will repent and pray for forgiveness. Influences we often allow ourselves to be subjected to and surrounded with lead us to “speak things (we) ought not” (1 Tim. 5:13). “Ought” carries a moral responsibility here. One should, therefore, be interested in speaking the “things which become sound doctrine” (Tit. 2:1) that he might be influential for the good rather than aiding and extending the cause of putrid behavior. The word of God demands that the Christian put away “all evil speakings” (Eph.4:31; 1 Pet. 2:1). Paul tells us that “bad company ruins good morals” (1 Cor. 15:33). Many in the church want to deny this, but look at their lives! Evil speech is a matter of morals. The company one keeps helps determine one’s morality. In the presence of jest and filth it is so easy to talk the same way. I have preached long enough and heard so many “confess their faults” (James 5:16), that I know the company they had was an overwhelming influence and determining factor upon the quality and character of their speech. The tongue is a very unruly member of the body to start with (James 3), and needs all the good encouragement and influence it can get. The immoral and ungodly atmosphere generated in so many TV programs is exactly what many Christians demand for satisfaction. People, we reap what we sow (Gal. 6:7)! Such an one has allowed Satan free access to his heart and lips, and the devil now uses him for the cause of ungodliness and immorality.

The pure in heart (Matt. 5:8) have everything; nothing good can come from a change. The Christian cannot ignore gutter language. Some pay to see movies that are as base and -gross as Satan can make them and declare that the “bad language” did not bother them because they just ignored it. The pure in heart can not give it such a “brush off.” One who “ignores” it is desensitized to evil! Shortly he will reveal no repugnancy to such, but will, actually, defend it. Profanity’s fruits are bad and every soul allowing Satan access to his heart will eventually bear fruit to identify him as profane. When Peter cursed and denied Jesus it was an effort for identity (Matt. 26:69-75). Who can believe that one loves the Lord while his lips tells lies and utters filth, while he specifically violates God’s will in taking the name of Almighty God in vane (Ex. 20:7). The name of God is holy and must be revered by man (Psa. 111:9); it must be “hallowed” by faithful disciples (Lk. 11:2; Matt. 6:9). One who uses the name of God in a common way is identified; his speech associates and identifies him as profane. By the words of the profane one is condemned (Matt. 12:37).

QUESTIONS

1. Do you consider profanity a grave issue?
2. What is profanity?
3. Show how a person or a thing might become profane.
4. Give discussion to the condition of one who is pro fane.
5. Give illustrations as to how one becomes profane.
6. What are some of the fruits of profanity?
7. Is a misuse of sacred service profanity?
8. Discuss the probability of a Christian remaining faithful to God who ignores the profanity he can control.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 21, pp. 344-346
May 24, 1979

By Keith Clayton

In traveling around the country and meeting with people, I find a marked increase in the reported use of marijuana. Indeed, perusing the various periodicals and journals would seem to verify this very observation. In the August 7, 1978 issue of U.S. News and World Report, we find the following statistics offered by Dr. R. Dupont, Jr.:

43,000,000 Americans have tried marijuana

16,000,000 Americans are current users

9% of high school seniors are daily users (because it is available to adults, it is available to adolescents kec)

11 of 20 college people have tried it

2 of 20 college people use it daily

15% of all auto accidents are attributed to it

I have met people I know personally and they seem to feel that marijuana use is not so harmful as some other people feel. Rather it is really quite harmless and morally right. Their reasoning goes, “After all, I use it and I am not such a bad person”! “I am O.K.!” But I pose this question: Since when has God ever determined rightness and morality upon the basis of human actions and rationalizations? The answer is never; moreover, the Scriptures specifically state that “It is not within man who walks to direct his own steps” (Jer. 10:23). God has provided the only guide to “life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1:3) in the instrument of the Bible. “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17). It is the Creator and not the creature that determines right and wrong, just and unjust, morality and immorality, Heaven or Hell as a final abode of the spirit of man. Let us consider some Bible facts and principles that are pertinent to the subject.

The relationship of the righteous and the Christ has to be one of respect for the name of Christ. An attitude of not wanting to do anything that would bring shame to the great and glorious name of the Son of God, the King of kings. A good way to remember this is to understand the spiritual relationship between the Christian and Jesus. “Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with him in glory” (Col. 3:2-4). The Christian and Christ are to be inseparable, and the Christian should not set his mind upon anything that Jesus would have no part of. This is further elaborated on in Matt. 5:16 where application is made, to the effect, that people of the world should find in Christians a light to lead them to truth and Jesus, “Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may -see your good works and glorify your Father which is in Heaven.” Therefore, in order for marijuana smoking to be acceptable in God’s eyes, it must do these two things: help keep Christians faithful and lead people to Christ. It does neither!

Marijuana use, according to Dr. R. DuPont, Jr., is a terribly deceptive practice. He further states (U.S. .News and World Report, August 7, 1978), “Only the tip of the iceberg has been seen regarding the ill effects in health, social activities, family living and work performance . . . . The first illegal drug that young people adopt is marijuana. Then there is a hierarchy leading to heroin . . . the thing is that when people stop using drugs, they usually go back down these steps in reverse sequence . . . . We already know enough to say marijuana poses a substantial risk. Anyone who takes the drug and thinks nothing has happened to his body has lost his mind.” As we can see, an expert, a member of the President’s Drug Abuse Commission explains that the possible effects of marijuana are nearly all negative in nature. Certainly, we cannot see Jesus engaging in these things nor can we see Jesus through the person who practices the consumption of marijuana.

Marijuana stands condemned (without considering the evil companions that travel with it) because of the significant health hazards it presents. Marijuana, according to a special report in Time Magazine (January 29, 1979, p. 26) outlined the adverse medical and health effects that are produced by using this drug.

“Immunity – Some studies have shown a marked reduction, in white blood cell response, the body’s prime defense against infection, in marijuana smokers.

Chromosomes – Human cell cultures from pot users have shown breaks in chromosomes carrying genetic information, or reduced numbers of chromosomes.

Many doctors believe, however, that some people can easily become psychologically dependent on the two drugs (marijuana and cocain-kec) and the effects they produce.”

Also we find more negative evidence from the April 1978 issue of the Science Digest. I. R. Rosengard, M.D. researched the after effects of a total of 37,000 occasions of marijuana use by many individuals. The physiological effects found are as follows:

1. Increase in heart rate.

2. Reddening of the eyes.

3. Extremely hard on bronchial system . . . like rubbing sand paper on lung tissue.

4. Mental and motor performance impaired, many cases severely.

One conclusion reached by this doctor was this. “Marijuana is highly dangerous if used before or during the use of an automobile (to others who do not use it alsokec). If it were legal and use of it became wide spread, accident rates would triple. It should never be legalized.” Moreover, in a CBS documentary titled, “Reading, Writing and Reefer,” research showed that one (1) marijuana “joint” is equivalent, in terms of respiratory system damage, to twenty-one (21) tobacco cigarettes. Additionally, there was a great deal of concern for the development of the adolescent who participated in the use of marijuana (aside from the terrible health effects). We can clearly see that marijuana is absolutely not productive, rather that it is absolutely a destructive element to add to an already morally decaying society.

Obviously, the Bible does not mention marijuana by name; however, there are God given principles which we call use to determine the acceptability of the use of this dru*. Those principles are in addition to the ones previously mentioned regarding the Christian-Christ-God’s words that have a very direct bearing on the subject at hand. Marijuana is damaging to the body, physically, mentally and spiritually – this can be readily established. Then we consider God’s will for our bodies and we discover, “Do you know that you are the temple of God and that the spirit of God dwells in you? If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.” There is no way a Christian, a lover of God, can use marijuana as a pleasure (reality modifier) and not endanger the attainment of a home in Heaven – because he or she deliberately damages their bodies. The Bible gives us a strong statement of damnation and destruction against the sinner who condones such behavior. “Be ye not deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. For the one who sows to this own flesh shall from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit shall from the spirit reap eternal life” (Gal. 6:7-8). If man gives in to unhealthy, sinful, sensual and fleshly desires (unscripturally), then he or she cannot be controlled by God’s word. Such a one cannot inherit the kingdom of God, according to the word of God (Gal. 5:19-21).

Let us listen to the words of Jesus in closing. Think of all the ill moral, mental and bodily effects of the use of marijuana (the fruits brought by its use) as we read the Savior’s words in Matthew 7:16-19. “Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor figs from thistles, are they? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit; but the rotten tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” What kind of tree is the consumption of marijuana? Can the child of God, the Christian do anything except totally abstain and be pleasing to his or her Creator? “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from the appearance of evil” (1 Thess. 5:21-22).

QUESTIONS

1. Why can we not justify the use of marijuana on the basis that “I use it and I am not such a bad person”?
2. What two things must marijuana do in order to be acceptable in God’s eyes. Does it do either?
3. Discuss some of the physiological effects of marijuana on the human body. What scriptures does this violate?
4. Discuss Gal. 6:7-8 with reference to the use of marijuana.
5. What kind of fruit-bearer would those who use marijuana be?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 21, pp. 343-344
May 24, 1979

By Curtis J. Torno, M.D.

The recent release of the Surgeon General’s second report on smoking re-emphasized the health hazard of smoking. Those of us in the medical profession have recognized these hazards for a long time. Despite a few denials from those who desire to use tobacco and willfully refuse to face facts, the truth has long been evident to even a casual observer. A trained observer knows the hazards of smoking all too well.

Smoking one package or more (20 cigarettes) a day will shorten one’s life on the average by twelve years. A select committee of the American Heart Association chaired by Dr. William B. Kannel, the director of the Framingham Study, said “325,000 premature deaths from heart disease can be directly attributed to cigarette smoking.”

A study from the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) reported in 1977 that the lung cancer rate among female smokers was 101.4 per 100,000 population and 392.8 per 100,000 among male smokers. Among nonsmoking females the rate was 9.4 per 100,000 and 12.5 per 100,000 among males. This is very significant! The USPHS estimate is that nearly 75,000 of the 84,000 who die of lung cancer every year would not die if they did not smoke. The cancer rate among female smokers is twelve times greater than it is among non-smokers and among male smokers it is thirty-five times higher that male non-smokers. That means that among smokers the lung cancer rate is 1 in 25 and among non-smokers it is nearly 1 in 10,000. Significant isn’t it?

The Framingham Study of over five thousand subjects for sixteen years has demonstrated conclusively that cigarette smoking is extremely hazardous to health. The over-all death rate from all causes for smokers is twice that of non-smokers in the same areas, in the same jobs and from the same backgrounds. The USPHS call smoking “the foremost cause or preventable disease and death in this country.” The British Royal College of Physicians compares the effect of cigarette smoking to the “lethal power of great epidemic diseases such as typhoid, cholera and tuberculosis.”

Among adult men, the smoking rate is down 25% but among women the rate is up about an equal amount. The greatest increase is among pre-adult girls and boys. Most of the increase in consumption has been among women and the very young. This is tragic, especially when as much as 15% of those 12 years and under smoke. The smoking rate is highest of any age group among those between 15 and 21, both girls and boys. It is a paradox that the older and wiser and best informed segment of our population is decreasing smoking while the uninformed and least wise are the ones that are consuming the most and taking up the habit at an increasingly younger age.

The Christian should understand that his smoking can affect not only his health and cause early death, but it affects his children and those with whom he associates. Children whose parents do not smoke only have a 15% smoking rate but among children whose parents do smoke, 85% also smoke. So not only do smoking Christians endanger their own bodies and souls, but affect and influence others also.

The only bright side to this ugly picture is that it is possible to stop smoking! More than that, to stop causes a marked diminution in the health hazard and death risk. According to the American Cancer Society’s study of more than a million subjects – the largest of the prospective investigations – male smokers had up to twice the, overall mortality of non-smokers; the risk being greater according to the number of cigarettes smoked and the duration of the smoking habit. Women smokers also had a higher mortality rate but less then men. Those who had given up smoking before joining the study had death rates that decreased according to ,the length of time since they last smoked cigarettes.

Those who used to smoke 1 to 19 cigarettes a day showed a steady decline in risk, so that after 10 years, they had the same mortality rate as those who had never smoked. Heavier smokers (more that 20 cigarettes a day) began to reduce their risk five years after stopping, but even afer 10 years their mortality rate was higher than those who has never smoked. In the ACS and other studies, mortality rates in the first year after stopping tend to be higher than those of smokers, because it is often illness that makes the person quit.

The study of British doctors is frequently quoted to illustrate a beneficial effect of stopping smoking on total mortality. Male doctors aged 35 to 64 years showed a fall in mortality of 12.4% in the years 1962-65 compared with 1953-57, whereas in the total male population the fall was only 2.9%. Half of the doctors who smoked had given up smoking during these years while those in the general population were said to have altered their smoking.

A recent report from the Framingham study provides support in that “men who gave up smoking after entry to the study had half the attack rate for coronary heart disease, excluding angina, compared with those who continued to smoke.”

All of this should be encouraging to those who may have smoked and desire to stop. Basically, if one stops now, in 10 years he has largely ovecome the hazardous effect on his body. Of course, if one continues to smoke they continue to run the increased risk of premature death.

Over 55 % of all physicians have quit smoking and now less than 20% of all physicians smoke at all. In a recent survey of over 10,000 physicians, 98% answered yes to the question “Do you consider cigarette smoking as hazardous to health?” and 2% answered that they weren’t sure yet. None answered the questionaire that it was their opinion that there was no hazard to health in smoking. As the American Cancer Society poster says, “Maybe they know something you don’t know.” You could know and should know what a health hazard smoking is.

Anyone who thinks cigarette smoking is not harmful and hazardous to one’s health cannot read the label on the package and cannot read the volumes of published material that is available. How many rational normal people would continue to eat cranberry sauce or tuna fish or candy if the package label said: “Warning consuming this material can be dangerous to your health!” Yet, millions go on inhaling cigarette smoke despite the warning. What would happen to the sale of tuna fish if it could be proven that 1 in 25 of all people who eat tuna fish would develop lung cancer? While there are other people who live in the same area and work at the same jobs, but who do not eat tuna fish and the lung cancer rate among these persons is 1 in 10,000. How many would continue to eat tuna fish?

This is the advice of a physician and almost unanimously the advice of any physician – stop smoking while you still can. Smoking cigarettes is a lethal habit that shortens your life, harms your influence, puts you in disregard to common sense and sound advice and puts you in direct opposition to many New Testament principles. If you do not stop for conscience sake – please stop for your body’s sake and the sake of those of our younger generation who will be encouraged to smoke or not smoke from your example.

QUESTIONS

1. In light of 1 Cor. 6:18-19, would you consider smoking a matter of defiling the temple of God? If so, what will happen if we destroy this temple?
2. What effect does smoking have on our children or those with whom we associate?
3. What should be the message to the general public, when over half of the doctors who smoked have given up the habit?
4. Why is it difficult to quit smoking? What does this say about our growth in relation to self-control, temperance, etc.?
5. If you do not agree that smoking is sinful and wrong, how would you justify this habit scripturally?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 21, pp. 341-342
May 24, 1979