Innocent to Suffer

Why Does God Allow The Innocent To Suffer?

When an innocent child suffers and then dies, such as with the case of David and Bathsheba’s first child (2 Samuel 12:13-24), the parents are often given sympathetic answers from people who mean well. But most of the clichés that are offered up give little real comfort. The idea that he has gone on to a better place still does not answer as to why the child had to suffer and die in the first place. It does not explain why the one’s left behind now have to suffer grief and loss. The idea that many express that it was just his time or that it was God’s will is just plain false.

The inadequacy of this answer was well illustrated on the day that John F. Kennedy Jr. died. That evening, Billy Graham was being interviewed by Larry King, and the subject of Mr. Kennedy’s premature death arose. When asked what he thought of it, Billy Graham answered with the tired old cliché, that it was just his time; that it was just God’s will. Larry King then answered and said, “Do you mean to tell me that God wanted him to die?” Billy Graham said not a word. Mr. King saw through the hypocrisy of Billy Graham’s statement immediately. When “Christians” like Billy Graham contradict themselves about the nature of God, it fuels the fires of the controversy over the presence of evil in the world. To say that God wills for any person to suffer and die is to ascribe evil intent on the part of God.

This has been heard for centuries.  Gideon in Judges 6 first made it.  If God is so good, why does He let bad things happen to us?  Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able to do so?  If so, then He is impotent.  Is it that He is able, but not willing?  If so, then He is not all good.  Or, is He willing but unable?  Then why follow Him?  James H. Dee, a retired classicist, wrote an article entitled Good God Is a Virtual Contradiction in Terms. This title sums up one of the main arguments made by those who try to deny God’s existence. They say that if God is all knowing, then He is aware of evil in the world.  And if He were all-powerful, then He would put a stop to evil in the world. And if He really loved man, the apex of His creation, then He would eliminate all pain and suffering from the world.

Since God is an omniscient, omnipotent, merciful God who loves man and seeks his best interest, then why does He allow the innocent to suffer?  First, note that God created man with free-will moral agency out of His great love for us. With free moral agency came the freedom to choose whether to obey or to disobey God’s word. Adam and Eve chose to disobey God and a result God sent them from the garden into the world and allowed them to be exposed to pain and suffering. Ultimately, all pain and suffering resulted from man’s sin. All of humankind has to suffer because of their sin.

Once man was sent from the garden into in the world, he became subject to three avenues of exposure to pain and suffering. First, we often suffer as Job did, not because of our own sin, but because of the sins of others. Also, we can suffer because of our own sins. Sometimes in committing fornication, a person contacts a venereal disease. Often people suffer debilitating injuries when the consume alcohol and run into a telephone pole. And finally we can suffer an accident or as a result from natural forces. For instance, a faithful Christian can loose all that he owns, even lose his loved ones simply because they were in the path of a hurricane.

Having noted the causes of pain and suffering, the question remains. Why does God allow these three avenues to exist? The first two avenues are in the world because sin is in the world. Part of the reason sin still exists is because of God’s mercy. That may sound like a contradiction, but the fact remains that if God did not want all men to have the possibility of salvation He would destroy all who commit sin, thus eliminating sin from the world. If God did not delay punishment on sinners and give them the opportunity to repent then there would be no one left alive past the age of accountability. The third avenue exists because God created the forces of nature and set them into motion. As long as the world lasts these natural forces will affect all of mankind.

Posted in Jack McNiel | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Innocent to Suffer

Christian

Christian in Name Only

One of the great misconceptions in the world today is the use of the term “Christian.” The term is regularly misused by people who follow man-made doctrines and still claim the name of Christ. The “Christian” community, or “Christendom,” is a group title that applies to just about anyone who believes in Jesus, prays, or maybe attends worship sometimes. We see athletes, musicians, and other celebrities claim to be Christian with a cross around their neck, but their actions don’t back it up. We see false teachers leading millions astray under the name of Christian, and that’s a problem.

Having said all of that, I believe we do a really good job of recognizing those misuses of the term and pointing them out. Refer to a false denominational teacher as “Christian” and you’ll likely have someone remind you that they aren’t really a Christian. Why? Because the definition of Christian comes from where we get all of our beliefs – the Bible. The New Testament outlined the distinguishing marks of a Christian, and we don’t have the authority to change or bend it to man’s misunderstandings. However, as always we must remember not to simply use the Bible to teachagainst something, but to use the same Scriptures to teach what we are for as well. Sure, the meaning of Christian that we take from the New Testament includes following the steps of salvation all the way into the waters of baptism and out into newness of life, and a true Christian worships God in Spirit and Truth just as the Word prescribes, but that can’t be where we stop. We can’t be satisfied with calling ourselves Christians because of two or three doctrines that separate us, or because we go to a church with the right name on the door, or because we pray sometimes, or because we read the Bible every now and then… you get the point.

Instead of letting the world today define what a Christian is with a lowest common denominator type of definition, let’s strive for the excellence of faith shown in the New Testament. A true Christian…

– Is wholly committed to Christ. The call Jesus gives us is one to come and take up our crosses every single day (Luke 9:23). This isn’t a call to enjoy eternal insurance while we carry on with the same lives we lived before or would live if we weren’t Christians. This is a call to die to self, to be willing to put anything and everything behind the cause of Christ as Paul did in Philippians 3:8-10. Just as it is wrong to call someone Christian when they teach false doctrine, so it is wrong to call someone a Christian when they don’t submit to Christ.

– Is dedicated to sowing the seed. This is a tough one. It’s not easy to go out and evangelize, as it can be one of the most intimidating things we ever do. However, it’s clear that Jesus wants His disciples to spread His teachings everywhere they go (Matthew 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16, Acts 1:8). If we really believe what He taught about hell and those who disbelieve, we’ll be all the more urgent to get out there and let people know what He has for them to hear. As with the parable of the sower we can’t guarantee how people will react, but that’s not our job. We’re here to point people to Him and let them make the decision.

– Is an example of Christ’s selfless love – Jesus Himself said that the distinguishing mark of His followers would be their love. We can never emulate His love perfectly, but He has set the standard for which we should strive. His love took Him out of heaven, down to earth, and onto the cross, all because we are sinners. He calls us not to simply love those who love us, but those who are our enemies as well. He set the example for us in this, as well. Every last one of us has sinned, which means we have all committed rebellion against God by turning from His holy standard. And yet Jesus loved us enough to die for us (Romans 5:8). It’s not our love for our families and friends that separates us as examples of Jesus Christ (Matthew 5:46). It’s our love for those we otherwise dislike, don’t understand, or don’t get along with that lets Him shine through us as a light to the world. Rather than looking at people as annoying, frustrating, or even as “too sinful” as the Pharisees did and as we can sometimes do with an increasingly-depraved world, it’s up to us to see them as He sees them – souls whom God loves and wants to see in heaven.
 
It’s time to take back the word Christian, and it’s time to show the world what we’re for rather than simply what we’re against. We’ll never establish the true definition of what a Christian should be if we’re always fighting and refuting the wrong definitions. Instead, let’s fight for ALL that a Christian is and be examples of it to the best of our ability, knowing His Spirit works in us and His grace is sufficient for our shortcomings.
 
Posted in Brad Harrub | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Christian

Preparation

The Importance of Preparation

Matthew 25:1-13 – “Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, who took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were foolish, and five were wise. For the foolish, when they took their lamps, took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. Now while the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. But at midnight there is a cry, ‘Behold, the bridegroom! Come ye forth to meet him’ Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, ‘Give us of your oil; for our lamps are going out.’ But the wise answered, saying, ‘Peradventure there will not be enough for us and you: go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.’ And while they went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast: and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us.’ But he answered and said, ‘Verily I say unto you, I know you not.’ Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour”

Consider this:

Throughout our sojourn here in the world many questions will arise and many opportunities for each one of us to deal with and choose various options in the type of life we develop from accountability to death. One of the choices we all have is to acknowledge God and serve Him or otherwise. To this proposition many people will immediately respond by saying; “I will not choose to believe in God nor will I lend myself to any other form of superstition” {i.e. or some similar mind game offered to justify a worldly or hedonistic life style}.

In the Bible reference above one is reminded by God via the Written Word to prepare now {i.e. while we have ability to choose} for the suddenness of the coming of the Lord, Jesus Christ to judge and assign all humankind from Adam to the last person on earth at His trumpet and His return. – Ref. John 12:48-50.

Each person on earth is responsible to Almighty God for their choices while here in the world; whether good and righteous or evil and wicked – James 4:13-17 – 13 Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: 14 Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appeareth for a little time, and then vanishes away. 15 for that ye ought to say, if the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that. 16 But now ye rejoice in your boastings: all such rejoicing is evil. 17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. KJV

ALWAYS BE ALERT; ALWAYS BE FAITHFUL, ALWAYS WATCH, “Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour”

Posted in Garreth L. Clair | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Preparation

Miracle Baby

Some years ago there was a storm that went through the upper Midwest.  The news reported that a tornado passed through a residential area and a baby was swept away.  No doubt, that was an emotionally tumultuous evening for the family.  However, after the storm was over, thankfully, the baby was found alive.  There was tremendous relief to the parents and family of the child; the emotions were running high in the recovery of this child and we can certainly thank God for this child’s safety.  Shortly after the baby was found, a headline was run on the Fox News channel, “Miracle Baby.”

What is so wrong in calling something a miracle?  What is right about calling something a miracle?  We don’t go around all day long calling everything a miracle.  We recognize that certain events that occur in life are routine and happen by way of the natural course that life takes.  God designed the world to work on a series of natural laws and these laws interact with each other and with us to ensure that we have a relatively stable world in which to live.

Gravity, for example, is one of God’s natural laws and it’s a great thing to have.  It keeps our feet on the ground; it keeps our cars on the road; it keeps our refrigerator from coming into the bedroom during the middle of the night.  I’m thankful for gravity!  Natural law is the non-miraculous way God keeps the earth going.

There are times, however, when natural law appears to be suspended.  For example, when a terminally ill cancer patient becomes better; when someone picks up a vehicle in order to free a trapped person underneath; or when a baby that has been swept up by a tornado or strong wind is found safe and sound.  Such events are unexpected and unlikely.  People see these improbable events and pronounce them “miraculous.”

One of the dangers with saying that something is a miracle is attributing the event to God’s direct involvement.  Three men once did this.  They had a friend who lost all of his family under terrible circumstances, who lost all of his property to enemies who raided his lands, and who lost his health to the terrible disease.  When they looked upon all of these improbable circumstances, they said, “God is punishing you!”  God said to those men, “You’re wrong!”  God hadn’t punished Job at all; Satan was the one who was responsible for Job’s suffering.

Another danger of this kind of thinking is concluding from these improbable events that one has a healthy relationship with God.  Someone once told me that he knew he had a good relationship with God because he had been saved from a falling brick wall and from pulling out into traffic in front of a semi-trailer truck.  My question to him was, “How do you know that God wasn’t ‘saving’ you to give you time to repent!?”  How do you know that Satan didn’t save you so that you would believe a lie?

Consider also that for every baby that is saved from a terrible event, there are dozens more that die.  Where does this put God if the one He saved He did so by miracle?  Does He not love the others enough to save them by miracle?  The Bible teaches that the age of miracles has ceased (1 Corinthians 13:8-10).  However, when working through natural law, God is fair to all; all are treated equally.

Let us credit God for blessings received because as our Creator, God is ultimately responsible for all things, indirectly.  However, let us not attribute direct actions to God that are beyond our knowledge.  Doing so takes us away from God’s word.  We walk on tenuous ground when we base our faith on our own presuppositions regarding improbable events.  Faith, the Bible teaches, comes from hearing God’s word (Romans 10:17).  Let’s leave it at that.

“Miracle Baby”

Some years ago there was a storm that went through the upper Midwest.The news reported that a tornado passed through a residential area and a baby was swept away.No doubt, that was an emotionally tumultuous evening for the family.However, after the storm was over, thankfully, the baby was found alive.There was tremendous relief to the parents and family of the child; the emotions were running high in the recovery of this child and we can certainly thank God for this child’s safety.Shortly after the baby was found, a headline was run on the Fox News channel, “Miracle Baby.”

What is so wrong in calling something a miracle?What is right about calling something a miracle?We don’t go around all day long calling everything a miracle.We recognize that certain events that occur in life are routine and happen by way of the natural course that life takes.God designed the world to work on a series of natural laws and these laws interact with each other and with us to ensure that we have a relatively stable world in which to live.

Gravity, for example, is one of God’s natural laws and it’s a great thing to have.It keeps our feet on the ground; it keeps our cars on the road; it keeps our refrigerator from coming into the bedroom during the middle of the night.I’m thankful for gravity!Natural law is the non-miraculous way God keeps the earth going.

There are times, however, when natural law appears to be suspended.For example, when a terminally ill cancer patient becomes better; when someone picks up a vehicle in order to free a trapped person underneath; or when a baby that has been swept up by a tornado or strong wind is found safe and sound.Such events are unexpected and unlikely.People see these improbable events and pronounce them “miraculous.”

One of the dangers with saying that something is a miracle is attributing the event to God’s direct involvement.Three men once did this.They had a friend who lost all of his family under terrible circumstances, who lost all of his property to enemies who raided his lands, and who lost his health to the terrible disease.When they looked upon all of these improbable circumstances, they said, “God is punishing you!”God said to those men, “You’re wrong!”God hadn’t punished Job at all; Satan was the one who was responsible for Job’s suffering.

Another danger of this kind of thinking is concluding from these improbable events that one has a healthy relationship with God.Someone once told me that he knew he had a good relationship with God because he had been saved from a falling brick wall and from pulling out into traffic in front of a semi-trailer truck.My question to him was, “How do you know that God wasn’t ‘saving’ you to give you time to repent!?”How do you know that Satan didn’t save you so that you would believe a lie?

Consider also that for every baby that is saved from a terrible event, there are dozens more that die.Where does this put God if the one He saved He did so by miracle?Does He not love the others enough to save them by miracle?The Bible teaches that the age of miracles has ceased (1 Corinthians 13:8-10).However, when working through natural law, God is fair to all; all are treated equally.

Let us credit God for blessings received because as our Creator, God is ultimately responsible for all things, indirectly.However, let us not attribute direct actions to God that are beyond our knowledge.Doing so takes us away from God’s word.We walk on tenuous ground when we base our faith on our own presuppositions regarding improbable events.Faith, the Bible teaches, comes from hearing God’s word (Romans 10:17).Let’s leave it at that.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , | Comments Off on Miracle Baby

Civility and Censorship

During the Rush Limbaugh radio show a comment was made by a caller that civility is a term the leftist individual and government equate to censorship. This statement has a lot of truth to it. There are not only examples of this in the current era, but in past eras. To be clear, the terms are not synonymous. Civility is being polite or courteous by definition. Censorship is the limiting or elimination of the sharing of speech, ideas, or actions.

Currently, the United States is in the midst of a very emotionally charged cultural atmosphere. The issues at hand relate to freedom, stewardship, and morality. The leftist agenda has been widely pushed by liberal media outlets and a democrat congress voted in starting 2006. In 2008, the most liberal senator in the United States along with the third most liberal senator in the United States (as determined by voting record) were voted into the white house. Those individuals were Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden. Immediately directing government through a series of unaccountable czars, socialists, Marxist Communist association, and criminals; the new regime set about on a course which would ignore the will of the people and its constitutionally concerned representatives.

The American people soon began to wake up to the disaster that was at hand. They engaged in peaceful gatherings and formed equally peaceful associations to counteract the atrocities which were occurring. Their words were clear and direct. “Give us back the America that our founding fathers gave us.” They were civil, but unwavering. The America those founders shared was one established in freedom and a trust in God. The issues of freedom, good stewardship, and morality have been a continual bone of contention in America for some time, seeing a slow deterioration for decades. However, the 112th congress and white house decreased all at alarming rates. As Americans began to voice their opposition, they were told they were not being civil in their request for the atrocities to stop. They were supposedly uncivil for demanding their representatives be faithful representatives to the people who elected them, rather than themselves. They were accused of being uncivil for asking the administration to stop spending the people’s money at a frantic rate. The leftist government being faced with their failings responded by saying the concerns of the people were rhetoric, hate speech, racists, violent, and divisive. In other words, they covered their ears and went on the attack.

Were the actions of those in opposition to the behavior of the government uncivil? Is it uncivil to tell someone they are in error and pointing out the specific error? Is it uncivil to gather in protest? It is uncivil to establish there will be legal punishment if the actions do not change – i.e. “America will vote you out of office if you do not straighten up?” This is what is being called uncivil by the left, as they make wild unfounded claims and accusations about their opponents. Efforts to boycott, intimidate, or legislate away American opposition have been tried, but they have not been successful. In other words, censorship has not yet prevailed.

Consider a waiter at Red Lobster presenting a bill to your table for the food you have consumed. Is he uncivil for asking accountability for the food consumed? Or is he uncivil when he politely asks your children to follow the rules of the restaurant which state there is no climbing on top of tables? The government’s response would be to call it uncivil and then demand the waiter go away. Would a restaurant manager be uncivil in quietly telling the table that they would have to leave if they did not contain their children? Gasp! Consequences! Threat! Punishment! According to the leftist, this would be uncivil.

The Bible is the mind of a God of peace. Civility by men of God, supporting freedom, good stewardship, and morality is described throughout scripture. If any being is civil, it is God, being courteous enough to give man chance after chance regardless of their sin. It is established in 2 Peter 1:2 that through knowledge of Him grace and peace will be increased. The knowledge of Him was shared by prophets of old by apostles during the timeframe of Christ as commanded in Mark 16:15. It was to be done in the civil manner of discourse: preaching (I Corinthians 1:21). Yet, many men refuse to know this civility. They want censorship. The response of King Ahab to the prophet Elijah in I Kings 18:17 was to call him a troubler of Israel. The king was not happy to see someone who would disagree with him. He considered someone who spoke truth to be a trouble maker. In fact, he so believed this that he had been trying to kill the prophet. He wanted censorship!

The man of God, Stephen, in Acts 7, shared the peaceful word of God. As he told the Jews of their atrocities, they became defensive. They did not want to know about their failings. They did not want to hear what they should do. They wanted to do only things pertaining to their own design. Just like the American left, they covered their ears and went on attack (Acts 7:54, 57). They felt Stephen was uncivil. They wanted censorship!

The apostle Paul sharing the gospel to the governor Felix (Acts 24:25) was sent away. Paul was not being uncivil, but the governor did not want to hear Paul’s words. The truth frightened Felix as it frightens many men. Civil men desire what is right and stand up for change. They point error. Felix chose not to adhere to civility, enforcing censorship upon Paul. He did not want to hear the truth. He did not want civility, but Censorship!

Like the men who rejected civility in the Bible, today’s leftist individuals and government have no qualms making threats, false accusations, or censoring those in opposition to them. They do not believe in civility or discussion. As stated by Barrack Hussein Obama when given the opportunity for discussion and civility, “We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.” In other words, sit down and shut up, Barack is the driver. Or how about when Americans wanted to discuss the financial freedom sucking monster called Obamacare? Mrs. Nancy Pelosi, told folks it would have to pass before people could know what was in it. In other words, “sit down and shut up”.  A government promising civil transparency has been characterized by censoring opposition through closed door meetings and strong arm tactics.

Civility is not censorship despite the leftist desire for it to be so. Civility in America has, however, often become a one way street. This is frequently tied directly to the moral compass of the parties involved. God demands civility of His people as He is civil. However, people without God have no higher reason than themselves to care about civility. Sadly, civility is a now being tied closely to weakness. This has been pinned to many past administrations as they have allowed the leftist mindset to dominate. This does not bode well according to Mark 3:25: “And if a house be divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand.” Civil discussion must be allowed to correct faulty behavior. But the past civil actions of administrations to allow the leftist mindset to dominate is not weakness, it is foolishness. To equate civility with weakness is a mistaken definition. God though civil is not weak. He will punish the sinful (Galatians 6:7-8). Americans tired of leftist attempts at censorship, have been quite civil. However, they were not weak, choosing to punish the leftists heavily in the 2010 elections. They will no doubt continue to do so in the future, exercising muscles of civility, if changes do not come about in America. Civility is strong, moral, and needed in America and the World. Censorship would do away with it.

During the Rush Limbaugh radio show a comment was made by a caller that civility is a term the leftist individual and government equates to censorship. This statement has a lot of truth to it. There are not only examples of this in the current era, but in past eras. To be clear, the terms are not synonymous. Civility is being polite or courteous by definition. Censorship is the limiting or elimination of the sharing of speech, ideas, or actions. Currently, the United States is in the midst of a very emotionally charged cultural atmosphere. The issues at hand relate to freedom, stewardship, and morality. The leftist agenda has been widely pushed by liberal media outlets and a democrat congress voted in starting 2006. In 2008, the most liberal senator in the United States along with the third most liberal senator in the United States (as determined by voting record) were voted into the white house. Those individuals were Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden (http://www3.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib_cons.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=desc#results). Immediately directing government through a series of unaccountable czars, socialists, Marxist Communist association, and criminals; the new regime set about on a course which would ignore the will of the people and its constitutionally concerned representatives. The American people soon began to wake up to the disaster that was at hand. They engaged in peaceful gatherings and formed equally peaceful associations to counteract the atrocities which were occurring. Their words were clear and direct. “Give us back the America that our founding fathers gave us.” They were civil, but unwavering. The America those founders shared was one established in freedom and a trust in God. The issues of freedom, good stewardship, and morality have been a continual bone of contention in America for some time, seeing a slow deterioration for decades. However, the 112th congress and white house decreased all at alarming rates. As Americans began to voice their opposition, they were told they were not being civil in their request for the atrocities to stop. They were supposedly uncivil for demanding their representatives be faithful representatives to the people who elected them, rather than themselves. They were accused of being uncivil for asking the administration to stop spending the people’s money at a frantic rate. The leftist government being faced with their failings responded by saying the concerns of the people were rhetoric, hate speech, racists, violent, and divisive. In other words, they covered their ears and went on the attack.

Were the actions of those in opposition to the behavior of the government uncivil? Is it uncivil to tell someone they are in error and pointing out the specific error? Is it uncivil to gather in protest? It is uncivil to establish there will be legal punishment if the actions do not change – i.e. “America will vote you out of office if you do not straighten up?” This is what is being called uncivil by the left, as they make wild unfounded claims and accusations about their opponents. Efforts to boycott, intimidate, or legislate away American opposition have been tried, but they have not been successful. In other words, censorship has not yet prevailed.

Consider a waiter at Red Lobster presenting a bill to your table for the food you have consumed. Is he uncivil for asking accountability for the food consumed? Or is he uncivil when he politely asks your children to follow the rules of the restaurant which state there is no climbing on top of tables? The government’s response would be to call it uncivil and then demand the waiter go away. Would a restaurant manager be uncivil in quietly telling the table that they would have to leave if they did not contain their children? Gasp! Consequences! Threat! Punishment! According to the leftist, this would be uncivil.

The Bible is the mind of a God of peace. Civility by men of God, supporting freedom, good stewardship, and morality is described throughout scripture. If any being is civil, it is God, being courteous enough to give man chance after chance regardless of their sin. It is established in 2 Peter 1:2 that through knowledge of Him grace and peace will be increased. The knowledge of Him was shared by prophets of old by apostles during the timeframe of Christ as commanded in Mark 16:15. It was to be done in the civil manner of discourse: preaching (I Corinthians 1:21). Yet, many men refuse to know this civility. They want censorship. The response of King Ahab to the prophet Elijah in I Kings 18:17 was to call him a troubler of Israel. The king was not happy to see someone who would disagree with him. He considered someone who spoke truth to be a trouble maker. In fact, he so believed this that he had been trying to kill the prophet. He wanted censorship!

The man of God, Stephen, in Acts 7, shared the peaceful word of God. As he told the Jews of their atrocities, they became defensive. They did not want to know about their failings. They did not want to hear what they should do. They wanted to do only things pertaining to their own design. Just like the American left, they covered their ears and went on attack (Acts 7:54, 57). They felt Stephen was uncivil. They wanted censorship!

The apostle Paul sharing the gospel to the governor Felix (Acts 24:25) was sent away. Paul was not being uncivil, but the governor did not want to hear Paul’s words. The truth frightened Felix as it frightens many men. Civil men desire what is right and stand up for change. They point error. Felix chose not to adhere to civility, enforcing censorship upon Paul. He did not want to hear the truth. He did not want civility, but Censorship!

Like the men who rejected civility in the Bible, today’s leftist individuals and government have no qualms making threats, false accusations, or censoring those in opposition to them. They do not believe in civility or discussion. As stated by Barrack Hussein Obama when given the opportunity for discussion and civility, “We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.” In other words, sit down and shut up, Barack is the driver. Or how about when Americans wanted to discuss the financial freedom sucking monster called Obamacare? Mrs. Nancy Pelosi, told folks it would have to pass before people could know what was in it. In other words, “sit down and shut up”. A government promising civil transparency has been characterized by censoring opposition through closed door meetings and strong arm tactics.

Civility is not censorship despite the leftist desire for it to be so. Civility in America has, however, often become a one way street. This is frequently tied directly to the moral compass of the parties involved. God demands civility of His people as He is civil. However, people without God have no higher reason than themselves to care about civility. Sadly, civility is a now being tied closely to weakness. This has been pinned to many past administrations as they have allowed the leftist mindset to dominate. This does not bode well according to Mark 3:25: “And if a house be divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand.” Civil discussion must be allowed to correct faulty behavior. But the past civil actions of administrations to allow the leftist mindset to dominate is not weakness, it is foolishness. To equate civility with weakness is a mistaken definition. God though civil is not weak. He will punish the sinful (Galatians 6:7-8). Americans tired of leftist attempts at censorship, have been quite civil. However, they were not weak, choosing to punish the leftists heavily in the 2010 elections. They will no doubt continue to do so in the future, exercising muscles of civility, if changes do not come about in America. Civility is strong, moral, and needed in America and the World. Censorship would do away with it.

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Civility and Censorship