Truth Magazine

By Mark Mayberry

Psalms 103:8-18

“Mercy among the virtues is like the moon among the stars, – not so sparkling and vivid as many, but dispensing a calm radiance that hallows the whole. It is the bow that rests upon the bosom of the cloud when the storm is past. It is the light that hovers above the judgment seat.”(1)

Mercy is an important biblical concept. The word appears hundreds of times in both the Old and New Testaments. In the New Testament, the term “mercy” is often found in the apostolic greetings. For example, Paul began his letter to Timothy by saying, “Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Tim. 1:2). Grace speaks of God’s “unmerited favor” toward sinners. Peace belongs to those who enjoy fellowship with God. But what is mercy?

Webster defines “mercy” as ” 1. A refraining from harming or punishing offenders, enemies, persons in one’s power, etc.; kindness in excess of what may be expected or demanded by fairness; forbearance and compassion; 2. imprisonment rather than the death penalty imposed on those found guilty of capital crimes; 3. a disposition to forgive, pity, or be kind; 4. the power to forgive or to be kind; clemency (to throw oneself on the ‘mercy’ of the court); 5. kind or compassionate treatment; relief of suffering; 6. a fortunate thing; thing to be grateful for; blessing.”(2)

Mercy involves God’s attitude toward man. It is an expression of his love for humanity. It includes pity, compassion, gentleness and forbearance. No one term can adequately convey the idea of mercy, for all these thoughts are intertwined.

“The tracing of the concept of mercy in the English Bible is complicated by the fact that ‘mercy,’ ‘merciful,’ and ‘have mercy upon’ are translations of several different Hebrew and Greek roots, which are also variously rendered in other occurrences by other synonyms, such as ‘kindness,’ ‘grace’ ‘favor’ and (cognate verbs). To picture this concept we would require a group of overlapping linguistic circles.”(3)

The Old Testament is rich in words that reflect the idea of mercy. The most common Hebrew word is hesed. It appears over 250 times in the Old Testament. In the KJV, it is usually translated “mercy,” but at times it is also rendered “kindness,” “loving kindness,” and “goodness.” It denotes God’s steadfast love, tenderly demonstrated by his covenant faithfulness with his chosen people. It carries the idea of mutual rights and mutual responsibilities.

Several Greek words are translated mercy in the New Testament. The most common are eleos, oiktirmos, and their related verbs. W. E. Vine defines the noun eleos as “the outward manifestation of pity; it assumes need on the part of him who receives it, and resources adequate to meet the need on the part of him who shows it.” He says the verb eleeo generally means “to feel sympathy with the misery of another.” He defines the noun oiktirmos as “pity, compassion for the ills of others. ” He says the verb oikteiro, means “to have pity on.”(4)

In the New Testament, mercy is often combined with grace. These are closely kin but distinct terms. As Trench points out, grace is related to sin while mercy is related to the misery that sin brings. “The charis (grace) of God, the gift of his free grace that is displayed in the forgiveness of sins, is extended to men as they are guilty, his eleos (mercy) as they are miserable.”(5)Divine grace removes our guilt, while divine mercy removes our misery.

Mercy is an expression of God’s love toward those in need (2 Cor. 1:3). Although man is unworthy and undeserving, yet God shows forbearance and mercy. He helps the helpless; he succors the afflicted; he lifts up the distressed. To sinners who are miserable, wretched and guilty, he offers solace and pardon.

An Essential Characteristic of God

Mercy is an essential characteristic of God (Psa. 62:12). Jehovah is a God of marvelous mercy and infinite love. The mercy of the Lord is great (Psa. t45:8) and plenteous (Psa. 86:5,15; 103:8). The earth is full of God’s mercy (Psa. 119:64). It reaches unto the heavens (Psa. 36:5; 57:10; 103:11; 108:4). It endureth forever (Psa. 89:2; 100:5; 103:17; 106:1; 107:1; lt8:1-4, 29; 136:lff; 138:8).

Mercy is associated with God’s forgiveness (Mic. 7:18-20; 1 Tim. 1:13-16), his forbearance (Psa. 145:8; Rom. 2:4), his covenant (2 Kgs. 8:23; Psa. 89:28), his judgment and justice (Psa. 89:14; 101:1), his goodness (Psa. 109:21) and faithfulness (Psa. 89:24), and also with his truth (Psa. 57:3; 85:10; 98:3; 108:4; Prov. 3:3; 14:22; etc.).

The Lord delights in those who fear him, who put their hope in his unfailing mercy (Psa. 147:11). His mercy supports us in times of distress (Psa. 4:1), trouble (Psa. 9:13; 59:16), and weakness (Psa. 6:2). When desolate and afflicted (Psa. 25:16), when consumed with grief and trouble (Psa. 31:9), we should appeal to God for mercy and help (Psa. 30:10). When forced to endure contempt and ridicule, God’s mercy sustains and protects us (Psa. 123:3-4; 143:12). It imparts strength in our time of weakness (Psa. 86:16). It provides support when our foot slips (Psa. 94:18). For all of this, let us rejoice and be joyful (Psa. 31:7; 90:14).

God’s mercy is the basis of his dealings with mankind (Psa. 119:124). It finds expression through his willingness to hear and answer prayer (Psa. 27:7). It leads to divine forgiveness and pardon (Psa. 51:1-2). It delivers us from certain destruction (Psa. 86:13). It is the foundation of our hope of salvation (Psa. 85:7; 109:26; 130:7). Therefore, let us trust in God’s infinite mercy (Psa. 13:5; 23:6; 52:8).

God’s mercy finds its consummate expression through Christ Jesus our Lord (Eph. 2:1-7; Tit. 3:3-7; 1 Pet. 1:3). He became a merciful and faithful high priest to make atonement for the sins of the people (Heb. 2:17). As a result, we can approach the throne of grace with confidence, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need (Heb. 4:15-16).

An Essential Requirement of Man

We have already seen that mercy is an essential attribute of God. Now we shall see that mercy is an essential requirement of man (Mic. 6:8). God has been merciful unto mankind, and as a result, he expects us to show mercy one to another (Lk. 6:36). We must be compassionate, tenderhearted, and forgiving (Eph. 4:31-32; Col. 3:12-13). Alexander Pope, once said, “Teach me to feel another’s woe, To hide the fault I see; That mercy I to others show, That mercy show to me.”(6)

Furthermore, the Bible commands that those who show mercy must do it with a spirit of cheerfulness (Rom. 12:8). When visiting those who are sick and shut-in, let us be radiant and cheerful. When attempting to restore an erring brother, let us be encouraging and hopeful. When forgiving another person of some wrong, let us be gracious and kind.

Remember that it is possible to “forgive” someone in such a way that makes our “forgiveness” an insult. It is possible to “forgive” while demonstrating an attitude of criticism and contempt. When called upon to show mercy and forgiveness, let us never forget that we also are sinners. As George Whitefield watched a criminal walking to the gallows, he said, “There, but for the grace of God, go I” There is a way of forgiving that pushes a man further down into the gutter; and there is a way of forgiving that lifts him up out of the mire. True mercy and forgiveness are based, not on a spirit of arrogant superiority, but on loving humility.(7)

Human mercy is beautifully illustrated through the example of the Good Samaritan (Lk. 10:25-37). Through generous acts of compassion and kindness, he proved himself to be the neighbor of the man who fell among robbers. We must go and do likewise! Who is my neighbor? Anyone who needs help, and whom I have the power and opportunity to help, regardless of his rank, race or religion.

A merciful man imitates God and disappoints Satan; a merciless man imitates Satan and disappoints God. How wrong it is for us to trust in God’s mercy but show none ourselves. Divine mercy is held in store for those who are merciful (Matt. 5:7). As Edmund Spenser once said, “Who will not mercy unto others show, how can he mercy ever hope to have?”(8) How can we hope for mercy if we render none? Those who are unmerciful render themselves incapable of receiving mercy.

Those who refuse to forgive the trespasses of others will find their own sins unforgiven (Matt. 6:15). In the parable of the unmerciful servant, the king compassionately forgave the enormous debt owed by one of his servants. Yet, this self-same man dealt harshly with a fellowservant who owed him only a trifling amount. The ruthless servant forgot that mercy requires mercy, and as a result, he was severely punished (Matt. 18:23-35). This same lesson can be seen in the story of Lazarus and the rich man. The tormented rich man cried out to Abraham for mercy, yet received none because he had not been merciful toward poor Lazarus (Lk. 16:19-25). Those who refuse to show mercy in the here and now will face the cold justice of God in eternity (Jas. 2:13).

The Jewish religious leaders of the first century also failed to grasp the fundamental requirement of mercy (Matt. 9:1013). They criticized Jesus for eating with publicans and sinners. Yet, Jesus’ defense was simple: he went where the need was the greatest. A doctor who visits only with patients in good health is a very poor doctor. His place is in the house of those who are ill; it is his glory to minister to the sick; it is his obligation to go to those who need him. Thus did Jesus.

Our Lord condemned the perverted legalism of the Scribes and Pharisees, and instructed them to study afresh the true nature of religion. They were more concerned with maintaining their own ceremonial holiness than with helping others in need. Like a doctor who refuses to visit the sick lest he become infected with some illness, they shrank away in disgust from sinners and refused to have anything to do with them. Furthermore, these self-righteous Jews were more interested in condemnation than in sympathy and forgiveness. They would rather leave a man lying in the gutter than reach down and lift him up. They needed to learn that it is not enough to go through the motions of outward orthodoxy. A refusal to show mercy to those in need causes our worship to be vain.

Jesus also criticized their shortsightedness. They scrupulously tithed garden herbs, while ignoring the weightier matters of the law: judgment, mercy and faith (Matt. 23:23-24). In commenting on this verse, J. W. McGarvey said, “‘Judgment’ means here right judgment of our fellow-men; ‘mercy,’ forbearance toward the guilty and compassion toward the suffering. ‘Faith’ is both the belief of the truth and habitual manifestation of that belief in the life.”(9) The Pharisees failed to grasp the real significance of God’s word. They kept the minutiae of the law, but forgot the things that really matter. They had confused religious formality with real devotion.

Conclusion

In closing, let us praise God for his boundless mercy. In the words of John Fletcher, “The greatest attribute of heaven is mercy; And ’tis the crown of justice, and the glory, Where it may kill with right, to save with pity.”(10) In Jehovah God, the qualities of justice and mercy are perfectly blended together. Like the Psalmist of old, let us sing aloud of God’s mercy and glorify his name (Psa. 59:16; 115:1).

How can we benefit from God’s mercy? From a divine standpoint, mercy precedes grace (Jn. 3:16; Lk. 1:78-79; Eph. 2:4). Yet, from a human standpoint, grace precedes mercy. “The same people are the subjects of both, since they are both guilty and miserable, yet the righteousness of God demands that the guilt should be absolved before the misery can be assuaged.”(11) God must pardon before he can heal. God must forgive before he can remove the burden of guilt. We must respond in obedience to God’s grace if we are to experience his mercy! Thus when these words appear together in the New Testament, grace always precedes mercy (1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4; 2 Jn. 1:3). Have you responded in faith to the grace of God? The myriad benefits of mercy cannot be yours until you render obedience to the gospel of Christ!

Finally, let us be mindful of the demands of mercy. To experience God’s mercy, we must keep his word (Psa. 25:10). We must confess and forsake sin (Psa. 51:1; Prov. 28:13). We must call on him (Psa. 86:5). We must fear him (Psa. 103:17). We must be penitent and contrite because of our sins (Lk. 18:13). We must offer our bodies as living sacrifices (Rom. 12:1). Finally, we must walk according to God’s rule (Gal. 6:16).

Endnotes

1. Edwin Hubbell Chapin; as quoted by Frank S. Mead, ed., The Encyclopedia of Religious Quotations (Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1965), p. 301.

2. Webster’s New World Dictionary, 2nd College ed., s.v. “Mercy.”

3. The New Bible Dictionary, s.v. “Mercy.”

4. W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, s.v. “Merciful, Mercy.”

5. Richard Chenevix Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, ed. Robert G. Hoerber (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1989), p. 183).

6. Alexander Pope, Universal Prayer; quoted by Frank S. Mead, p. 302.

7. Adapted from William Barclay, The Letter to the Romans (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1957), p. 176.

8. Edmund Spenser, The Faerie Queen [1590], VI, I, st. 42; quoted in Barlett’s Familiar Quotations, 15th Edition (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1980), p. 174:3.

9. J.W. McGarvey, Commentary on Matthew and Mark (1875; Reprinted ed., Delight, AR: Gospel Light Publishing Co., n.d.), p. 199.

10. John Fletcher: Lover’s Progress, Act III, Sec. 3; quoted by Frank S. Mead, p. 301

11. Trench, p. 184.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 4, pp. 114-116
February 21, 1991

By Carroll R. Sutton

According to the Financial Statement of the year ending June 30, 1989, Boles Home spent 310,484.00 per child (cared for) for Child Care, $5,948.00 per child for Plant Operations, and $6,543.00 per child for Administration and General.

Added up, this means that Boles Home spent $22,975.00 per child (cared for) for one year! Rather expensive child care, isn’t it?

In addition to the above, Boles Home spent $40,879.00 for Commissary, $42,338.00 for Development and Estate Planning and $78,883.00 for Social Services that same year. For these “items” Boles Home spent $162,100.00.

Boles Home received $507,199.00 in revenue from fees, rent, investment income and other income for that same year. This provided $9,753.00 for each of the 52 children for whom care was provided.

They also received $699,915. 00 in contributions, legacies and bequests. In total support and revenue Boles Home received $1,207,114.00 in one year!

In our last issue of The Instructor we showed that Tennessee Children’s Home spent $16,779. 00 per child for one year – and that seems ridiculously expensive. In comparison with $22,975.00 per child for one year that Boles Home spent, it seems that TCH did a much more efficient job than Boles Home. At least, what TCH did wasn’t as expensive.

By the way of comparison, it is my understanding that the State of Alabama paid an average of about $2,400.00 (plus medical costs) per child to foster parents to give foster care to children for whom the State had responsibility.

Benevolence or Big Business?

(Reproduced from The Instructor, published by the Albertville, AL Church.)

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 4, p. 109
February 21, 1991

By R.J. Stevens

And I say unto you, whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” Some are teaching that the “whosoever” and the “whoso” refer only to believers; namely, those in covenant relationship with God. Most of those who espouse this doctrine also teach that a believer who is living in an unlawful marriage (adulterous relationship) would have to dissolve that marriage to save his or her soul. They believe repentance and prayer, which is the law of pardon for the believer, involves turning from the sin of adultery and/or any other sin in order to be forgiven as a child of God (Acts 8:22).

On the other hand, they teach that an unbeliever who is living in an unlawful marriage (adulterous relationship) would not have to dissolve his marriage if he repents and is baptized. If repentance to the believer means dissolving an unlawful marriage, would not repentance to the unbeliever involve dissolving an unlawful marriage? We need to realize that the book of Matthew was written after the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and was primarily for the benefit of Jewish believers and unbelievers.

Let us consider some rhetorical questions. Can an unbeliever and a believer commit and thus be guilty o’f the same immoral sins? Can an unbeliever and a believer both love their neighbor? Can an unbeliever and a believer both be morally pure? an both obey the laws of the land? Can both he lawfully married? Can a believer and/or an unbeliever put away his or her companion for fornication and marry another without committing adultery? There is only one passage that gives both the believer and he unbeliever that right and it is found in Matthew 19:9.

Can a believer become an unbeliever? According to Hebrews 4:1-11, we learn that believers can fall into unbelief. Can a Christian who is living in an unlawful marriage say that he did not have enough faith when he was first baptized and thus be baptized again and continue to live in an adulterous relationship? This is not hypothetical – we heard a man say this very thing. He felt that being baptized again would make his second marriage lawful.

Not very long ago, we heard a terribly strange doctrine on one of the television talk shows. There is an atheistic organization, with headquarters in St. Louis, Missouri, advocating people to go through their ceremony of being “de-baptized.” It sounded weird then but it is even stranger today. They were proud of denying their faith and encouraging others to do the same. You don’t have to go through their ceremony to deny your faith. Can anyone who has lost his faith and is living in adultery regain his faith and be re-baptized? Does his second baptism sanctify his adulterous marriage, making it a lawful relationship for him to continue in? The answer is no because his second baptism would not sanctify his adulterous marriage any more than his first baptism. Surely we can see that repentance, as it relates to an adulterous marriage, demands turning from the sin of adultery and not continuing in it.

The fornicator of 1 Corinthians 5 had his father’s wife. Was his father a believer? We don’t know, but it doesn’t make any difference. Was his father’s wife a believer? More than likely she was not, because the instructions Paul gave the church at Corinth concerned the man, who was a believer. Did he have her before he was baptized or after his baptism? It doesn’t say because it doesn’t make any difference. Did this man need to repent and dissolve this adulterous relationship? 1 Corinthians 5:5 says he had to be withdrawn from to save his soul in judgment. Furthermore, 2 Corinthians 2:6-8, implies the punishment had accomplished what Paul desired. Thus, this man truly repented.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 teaches that some of the Corinthians had been homosexuals, idolaters, fornicators and adulterers. If one can see that obeying the gospel involves the homosexual putting away his homosexual partner, the idolater putting away his idol or the polygamist putting away his many wives, he ought to see that the adulterer needs to put away his adulterous partner. God and his people in Corinth could not have fellowship with the fornicator who had his father’s wife. The reason is because the only way any fornicator can have fellowship with God and his people is to quit fornicating – just as the guilty man, in 1 Corinthians 5, did by severing his relationship with his father’s wife. We are not saying this to destroy souls but we are hopeful that it will help souls to be saved in the day of judgment.

Many Have Chosen To Be Unmarried

The apostle Paul, in 1 Corinthians 7:32-34, made it clear that people do not have to be married to go to heaven. In fact some have married companions that have destroyed their hope of heaven. Choosing a marriage partner is one of the most important decisions in life. There are faithful Christians who have made the choice to remain unmarried because they have not found the marriage partner they believe will help them go to heaven. They have the lawful right to marry (1 Cor. 7:2) but choose to remain unmarried because their first interest is the kingdom of Heaven.

Many widows and widowers have chosen to remain unmarried because they, too, have not found the companions to encourage them in their goal of the heavenly home. They have the right to marry again (1 Cor. 7:39) but they also choose to remain unmarried because the kingdom of Heaven is first in their lives. Some have put away their companions for fornication and choose to remain unmarried because their first interest is the heavenly kingdom. These also have the right to marry again (Matt. 19:9) but choose to remain unmarried. Some have put away their companions for an unscriptural cause and have made the choice not to marry again, They realize they don’t have the right to marry again according to Matthew 19:9; Luke 16:18; Mark 10:11, 12. This decision is made because a home in heaven is more important than an unlawful relationship here on the earth. There are those who have been put away because they were guilty of fornication. Many in this category have chosen to be unmarried because there is no scriptural right for them to marry again (Matt. 19:9). They afso follow the course of being unmarried in order to save their souls and to have the hope of heaven in their hearts.

According to Galatians 5:19-21, Hebrews 13:4 and many other passages which we would cite, adultery will keep a person from going to heaven. There are many men and women today who are committing adultery in their unlawful marriage. Should they continue in their sin of adultery that grace may abound? Paul says, “God forbid” (Rom. 6:1,2). Isn’t it possible that this is what Jesus meant in Matthew 19:12, when he said, “. . . and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it”?

Our Thinking Must Be Governed By Truth Rather Than Emotion

What is a teacher of God’s word supposed to tell people who admit that their marriage is unlawful. “When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul” (Ezek. 33:8,9). We must speak as the oracles of God (1 Pet. 4:11). If a teacher of God’s word warns a person to turn away from adultery, he is speaking as the oracle of God. When a teacher tells a person that he can continue living in an unlawful marriage because his baptism put him into covenant relationship with God, this is not speaking as the oracles of God. It is for just this type of teaching that the prophet declared, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! ” (Isa. 5:20,21) An unpleasant truth is profitable but pleasant error will not profit the teacher or the hearer.” May God help us all to reprove, rebuke and exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine (2 Tim. 4:24). We put off having this article published for over two years because I am not a writer and certainly no scholar. However, I don’t want to straddle the fence on this issue. It is my desire to stand on God’s truth. This might sound strange but I welcome opposing views more than agreeable views. We also pray that he will help each of us to have the right attitude toward one another by keeping our hearts open to further study. (Reprinted from Gospel Truths, Dec. 1990.)

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 5, pp. 131-132
March 7, 1991

By Ron Halbrook

In Isaiah 5:20 the prophet of God thundered against the perversion and perverts of his day,

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Such men pile sin upon sin, perversion upon perversion, and struggle to drag this ever increasing load of ungodliness through life as an overloaded wagon. It is pulled by cords of falsehood, to which they have harnessed themselves (v. 18). They defy God to do anything about it, laughing at the threat of his judgment (v. 19). No one can rebuke or restrain them because they “are wise in their own eyes” (v. 21). Their moral vision is dimmed not only by arrogance and conceit but also by intoxicating drink (v. 22). They “justify the wicked” and “take away the rights of the ones who are in the right! ” (v., NAS 23) God said their root and their blossom would rot, and be consumed “as the fire devoureth the stubble” (v. 24).

Those who call evil good in our time proclaim sexual perversion and pornography as “art.” Robert Mapplethorpe was a photographer and a homosexual who died of AIDS at 42 in March 1989. A collection of his photographs has toured America with the help of tax money from the National Endowment for the Arts. It appeared at the Contemporary Arts Center in Cincinnati, Ohio in the Spring of 1990. On 7 April the arts center and its director were charged with pandering obscenity and displaying children in “nudity-oriented material.”

In addition to harmless pictures, there were male and female nudes and homoerotic images. Two portraits of children display their exposed genitals. Five photos involve sadomasochism (seeking pleasure by inflicting pain on oneself or others). One of these is a self-portrait of Mapplethorpe with a bullwhip in his rectum. Another shows two men with one urinating into the mouth of the other. Three additional obscene pictures similarly explore Mapplethorpe’s homosexual perversion. These seven were the basis of the court case.

“Jury acquits art museum in obscenity case,” even though “. . . They were gross,”‘ read two headlines in the Houston (TX) Chronicle (6 Oct. 1990, p. 1A and 7 Oct., p. 6A). On Friday, 5 October 1990, the jury returned “not guilty” verdicts. Jurors who admitted the homoerotic Pictures projected a lascivious or “prurient interest in sex and depicted sexual conduct in a patently offensive way” decided the pictures were legally protected by their “artistic value”

(7 Oct., p. 6A). Ann Tucker of Houston’s Museum of Fine Arts agreed that Mapplethorpe’s homosexual and sadistic pictures are “legitimate subjects for art if done by an artist in an artful way.” The artist must express his “thoughts and feelings and experiences,” she said, and, “If it’s art, it’s not obscene” (“MFA reacts to victory in Cincinnati,” Houston Chronicle, 6 Oct. 1990, p. 18A).

This is all very enlightening! it turns morals into semantics. Hocus-pocus, evil is art and if it’s art, it’s not evil. Now you see evil, now you don’t – it’s “art.” What if an artist’s “thoughts and feelings and experiences” lead him to cut off parts of his body or the body of another person? Let him record the images on film and circulate the photo collection with the help of tax money. “If it’s art, it’s not mutilation.” Rape? Put it on film, circulate the pictures, and, “Presto! If it’s art, it’s not rape.” See it? Get it? “If it’s art, it’s not murder.”

Talk about a new morality, this could eliminate all crime! If a choreographer waltzes into a bank and robs it, it’s not robbery, it’s art. The pictures are not evidence of a crime, they are a collection of images of the robbers, er, I mean, artists’ “thoughts and feelings and experiences.” Another show can go on the road with tax money. Actually, every U.S. Post Office displays the pictures of such artist’s faces at government expense, so why not display photos of their “work” too? Think of it: every post office can be a cultural center of art!

Prisons need culture, too. How else can inmates be rehabilitated? Art collections depicting bank robbery, rape, and murder will be v-er-y popular and educational. Prison overcrowding will be solved – prisons will soon be empty. Criminals will become “artists” who record their “thoughts and feelings and experiences” on film. To interfere with the recording and displaying of their “work” would be “censorship.” (If some Bible-thumper retorts, “If it’s art, it’s not censorship,” tell him to sit down and shut up before he gets us all confused. We can solve all the world’s problems in the name of “art” if we can keep the Bible out of it.) Culturally deprived policemen may try to arrest some poor artist at work, but the criminal, er, I mean, artist will be instructed by the National Endowment for the Arts to recite his rights in the creed of fine arts, “If it’s art, it’s not a crime.” All activities from the work of petty thieves (er, budding artists) stealing hub caps to the work of professionals running drug cartels are “legitimate subjects for art if done by an artist in an artful way.” The con artist was just ahead of his times!

Preachers Part of the Problem

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil” (Isa. 5:20).

The text well describes the spirit of our age. In our overrefinements we arc losing the sternness of the truth, carefully polishing off every edge and point and corner that might prick conscience into activity. We are toning down moral distinctions until they are becoming quite confused and indistinct; we can hardly tell for certain what is right and what is wrong, what is evil and what is good (Pulpit Commentary on Isaiah, 1:102).

When a jury made up mostly of church members can attach artistic value and legal protection to homoerotic and sadistic photos, our nation has lost its moral bearings and sense of moral outrage. We are puffed up with vain pride and empty falsehood when we get too refined to call evil by its real name. Its real name is not art!

What are churches teaching when so-called religious people will compromise truth and right in the face of the vilest immoralities and criminal acts? The people of America have been fed the moral pablum of situation ethics until “the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint” (Isa. 1:5). Preachers have been accentuating the positive until they really have eliminated the negative – not eliminated sin and evil from the lives of people, but eliminated the ability of people to recognize sin and evil. If babies can be murdered in the name of “a woman’s choice,” certainly children can be used and abused as the subjects of erotic photography in the name of “art.” If churches can compromise on abortion, church members can compromise on pornography. If some churches can view homosexual preachers as acceptable though not ideal, some church members can view homosexual pictures as acceptable though not ideal.

As preaching has drifted further and further from the Bible, so the people who hear such preaching have drifted further and further from the Bible. The only solution is to go back to the Bible as the final and absolute revelation of God’s will, and as the final and absolute standard of right and wrong. Scriptural marriage is honorable and right (Heb. 13:4; Matt. 19:9). God allows one man to one woman in marriage for a lifetime, the only exception being that an innocent partner may put away a fornicator and marry another. All marriages in violation of this principle are adulterous and sinful. This is the very same principle which condernns homosexual practices as immoral and sinful. The same Bible which prohibits homosexuality prohibits adulterous marriages. Sodom was the cultural capital for artists and museums which depicted homosexuality and sadism. God destroyed the city with “brimstone and fire” and recorded it as a reminder of his wrath against such perversion (Gen. 19:24-28; Jude 7).

Practicing or tolerating homosexuality is characteristic of men and women who turn awary from God and reject his truth (Rom. 1:18-32). Professing God or religion does not change this reality. Nations which profess God but become engulfed in perversion decay and fail. “Righteousness exalteth a nation; but sin is a reproach to any people” (Prov. 14:34). More serious than the fall of a nation is the eternal torment of hell which awaits those who live and die in sin (Matt. 25:46).

The simple truth is that preachers are not preaching the simple truth. In Jeremiah’s time, wickedness filled the land because the prophets and the priests lied to the people about their sins, saying, “Peace, peace; when there is no preace.” People became blind to their sins and “were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush.” When Jeremiah cried out against their sins and begged the people to walk in “the old paths” of truth, they would not listen because they preferred the positive message of false teachers (Jer. 6:13-17).

People are confused and blinded today by a combination of loving their sins and loving their preachers who speak an uncertain sound and minimize sin. Men will not come to the truth of the gospel of Christ while their hearts are set on sin and on preachers who tickle their itching ears (Jn. 3:19-21; Matt. 6:22-23; 2 Tim. 4:2-4). Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 7:21-23). Just like not everything called art is true art, not everything called religion is true religion.

It is time to call evil evil, and good good. Let God be true. His Word is right. Rather than blurring the line between truth and error, we must diligently search God’s Word and take our stand for truth and right. The Bible settles what is right in matters of morality and in the realm of religion. The Bible is right when it calls sinners to believe in Christ, repent of every sin, confess Jesus as God’s Son, and be immersed in water for the remission of sins (Acts 2:37-38; 8:35-38).

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 4, pp. 112-113
February 21, 1991