True? False? or Who Cares? Part 5

Posted on by
2

I’ve titled this series “True? False? Or Who Cares?” I’m concerned that the “who cares” crowd is winning. Someone asked me the other day what I thought of subjective truth. My problem is that I don’t even understand what this means. In my reply, I used this example: Suppose one of your friends doesn’t believe in absolute truth. All truth is subjective, he thinks. Ask him to do this – when he gets his next pay check, he should cash it at the bank, bring all of the currency home, wad it up, and burn it in the middle of the driveway.

If there is no such thing as truth, then there is no such true statement as, “That $1500 worth of currency can buy me food or pay down my mortgage.” That’s just a matter of personal opinion and therefore burning it is no more significant than leaving it intact. Now, we all know that this whole example is stupid. In the real world, we work with true and false all the time. It’s just when it comes to religion and morals, and maybe politics, that everything is questionable. And we know what the reason is. No one really wants some Being to be able to tell us what to do.

I started this series by referring to Dr. Willard’s discussion of “profession”, “commitment”, “faith”, and “knowledge.” He was primarily discussing religion and the fact that we often emphasize profession and commitment without the foundation of knowledge or truth. This is not only a religious problem, but a problem in most areas of human life and is at the root of the collapse of so much discourse. Let’s take it out of the field of religion and use the words, feelings, opinions, beliefs, and truth. I maintain that our problem is that we argue at the level of our feelings and opinions. People operate on the assumption that if they feel something is true or are of the opinion that it is true, then it must be true.

It used to be that discussions and arguments were carried out at the truth level. People would say, “What you are saying is not true because of these three facts.” Someone else might respond by stating that fact number 2 isn’t true for the following reasons….

That’s not how arguments go today. People say things like, “I just don’t think you’re right because I just feel that….” Or, “You can’t say that because how will people who disagree with you feel about it if they think you are saying they are wrong?”

We need to get back to focusing on what the truth is and how we discover it. We need to base our arguments and discussions at that point.

Back to the religious aspect for a minute. When someone makes a profession of faith, it should be faith in something that is asserted to be true, not just in some mystical feeling. The Christian teaching is that in real time and space, Jesus Christ was literally born from a virgin. At some point he was executed on a Roman cross and he died, i.e., his heart stopped beating and his brain ceased to function. Three days later he came alive, proving that he was God in a human body. We assert these things to be true meaning we believe they actually happened.

When we get careless and begin to think at the level of our feelings, then we are exactly where Dr. Willard describes – profession and commitment become dominant, and the grounding in truth that people need won’t be there to sustain them through all of the challenges of life.

Thoughts on Praying for our Leaders

Posted on by
Reply

Some thoughts about praying for leaders.

1 Timothy 2:1–4 (NKJV)

1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

We have a tendency to isolate a verse or two that we’re focusing on from the rest of the passage. That has happened to me in relationship to this passage. We are exhorted by Paul to pray for all who are in authority over us so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life. What we usually think about is to pray for wisdom for our leaders so that things stay calm and crisis free so that there won’t be a lot of turmoil in our lives. Praying for wisdom for our leaders is a valid focus of our prayers. But there is more to this passage. First, I notice that the purpose of living a quiet and peaceable life is for the demonstration of our godliness and reverence. But more than that, the passage is focused on the fact that God is a saving God. He desires all men to be saved, and that includes our leaders. I’m starting to think that this should be the main focus of our prayers for our leaders. Leaders who know Christ will govern with wisdom and promote the quiet and peaceable conditions that we desire.

True? False? or Who Cares? Part 4

Posted on by
Reply

In the last article in this series we looked at the concept of “presuppositions.” Presuppositions are ideas we believe or accept without proof. Everyone has them. Even in mathematics we have things called postulates which are statements that are accepted as true without proof. I remember a math class I had once where we assumed that the number 1 existed. We also assumed that the next number in a counting series could be found by adding the number 1 to the previous number. Every other “truth” that we used in the course had to be proved from these two postulates or assumptions or presuppositions.

So what does this have to do with our discussion of truth and how we know it? Let’s take the Creation vs Evolution debate for example. I worked in the public schools for 42 years and have seen the nuances that this debate has taken. When everything is sorted out through the legal system it usually comes down to this: Creation is a religious, faith-based idea and therefore has no place within the science curriculum. Evolution however is a scientific truth and therefore can and should be taught within the science curriculum.

I realize that I am probably not going to change many minds in this short article, but this is how I see it in light of our discussion about truth and how we know it. Scientific knowledge and truth come from proposing an hypothesis and then designing a controlled experiment to test that hypothesis to see if it is true. In the case of the origin of life, it seems obvious to me that there can be no experiment designed that will duplicate the conditions, time span, and forces needed to create and evolve life by random processes. Every attempt so far has involved a high level of human thinking and planning involved to set up conditions favorable for the creation of life. The true condition of randomness and chance events were not duplicated.  Even so, life has not been created by those experiments.

On the creation side, there is no one alive today who saw God create anything. All we have is ancient documents within various religious traditions describing how God did it.

My point is that those who claim evolution is true are actually proposing something just as faith-based as a creationist is.

But the evolutionist says, “No, that’s not true. You creationists are bringing God into the mix. We are providing a natural and scientific explanation of how life began and evolved.” The problem here is with the assumptions or presuppositions that underlie what we believe. In order to fit the definition of science, God must be left out of the equation. That is an assumption. All of the study and investigation that takes place looks for explanations that leave God out. It is assumed that God either does not exist or does not play any role in any way in the natural world. But suppose God actually exists. If God actually exists, isn’t it madness to try to get at the explanation for why things are the way they are without including him in the mix?

“But”, they say, “we don’t know if God exists or not and therefore, we choose to leave him out of our assumptions regarding science and simply look for the natural causes of things.”

OK. That’s fine. But don’t call your explanation of origins totally scientific because you are basing your “science” on the belief that certain things are true. There are a set of beliefs or assumptions upon which the entire system is built. That makes it a faith based philosophy.

A scientist who includes the belief in a god or supreme being in his foundational assumptions will also build a faith-based science. But he, when he looks at the order and apparent “design” in the universe, will come to the conclusion that there is a designer behind it.

It’s interesting that in normal life we do this all the time. If you’re walking through the woods and you come upon a group of similar sized stones lying in the dirt forming the shape of a circle, you assume someone of intelligence placed them that way. You don’t assume that they just fell there randomly. And yet when some scientists look at the brain or the eye, they don’t see a designer at all, but millions of years of random circumstances producing it. So we attribute a simple circle of stones to an intelligent designer, i.e., a human being behind it, but something as complex as an eye evolved with no intelligent activity involved in it at all.

When trying to determine the truth, everyone begins their investigative reasoning with presuppositions or assumptions. Mathematicians do it and scientists do it. We all do it. We need to be careful to recognize that we are doing it. When you make statements of truth or believe what someone else says, look for the presuppositions that underlie those statements. Second, make sure that when you are discussing what you believe to be the truth, acknowledge your presuppositions. Don’t hide them. Finally make sure your presuppositions are logical and consistent. Only in so doing will you be able to get at the truth whether it is in the field of science, politics or religion.

True? or False? or Who Cares? Part 3

Posted on by
3

(Part 1 is here: https://thetuinstras.net/?p=1387)

In the first article in this series we talked about the fact that in normal daily life we come at truth in very informal ways and yet in ways that work at the practical level. When we build our homes, we conform them to certain truths about how the construction needs to be done so our homes are safe and function well. We learn these truths by applying what we receive on good authority. This approach seems to be thrown out the window when it comes to discerning, believing and proclaiming religious truth.

In the second article we expanded more on the methods we use to discern what truth is. Here again we discussed the fact that most of us haven’t come in contact with the truth first-hand in most cases. In other words, we don’t learn to build a house by trial and error. We usually learn from somebody who already knows. We weren’t there when historical events took place and we aren’t privy to the information that forms the basis for political decisions. Most of us are not involved in the working out of mathematical equations or scientific principles. We learn these things and base our decisions on them based on good authority. But it’s interesting to recognize that different people accept different authorities. Why is this so? Why, when the President, any President, announces a decision, do some people assume it is a wise and truthful decision whereas others claim the decision is faulty and dishonest? Why do we gravitate to one news source over another or one religious leader over another? Most of these propensities to lean in one direction or another are not driven by facts that we know firsthand.

There are usually unproved and sometimes improvable assumptions, called presuppositions, that move us in one direction or another when we search for truth. The point I would like us to think very seriously about is that there is no guarantee that these presuppositions are directing us toward the truth. Our feelings tell us our sources are true, and we believe they are, but there is no guarantee. I may listen to a particular news source because I feel that it is a truthful source of information. But what makes me think that? And just because I think it, does that make it true? I watch with fascination as CNN fans put down Fox News for presenting a slanted view of the facts. At the same time, I hear Fox News followers cut down CNN for painting a false picture of causes and events. Since CNN and Fox present rather different perspectives on events, they can’t both be giving the true and complete picture. One or the other or both are presenting shaded views of the truth. Our presuppositions drive us to listen to and believe one over the other … or neither. Why is that?

The same thing occurs in religious discussion. Some people do not believe that the Bible can be historically accurate and truthful in the narratives about Jesus Christ, because it describes events which people have never seen with their own eyes. These miracles are described as though they are facts, but some people dismiss them out of hand because of the presupposition that such things cannot and therefore did not take place. Think of the implications if the resurrection of Jesus actually did take place. In other words, if we take it out of the realm of a religious teaching and put it into the same realm as the assassination of Julius Caesar or any other historical event, what would that mean? Think about it. If this man really died, his heart stopped beating, and his brain stopped functioning, someone put him into a cold cave, and then three days later he was alive again, wouldn’t such an event warrant a place in the history books? But somehow it has been relegated to a religious teaching, and the thought that it actually happened has pretty much disappeared. Has this happened because the history of it has been shown to be faulty or because of presuppositions coming into play?

Our presuppositions tend to move us toward some information sources and away from others. We believe some people who purport to be authorities and we reject others. In most cases we haven’t and usually can’t do the research required to independently verify these authorities. This situation shouldn’t drive us to the conclusion that the truth doesn’t exist or that it can’t be known. We don’t do that in normal daily life and we shouldn’t do it in philosophical, political, or religious areas of life. However, we do need to recognize that our presuppositions may not be pointing us to the truth. If we really want to know what the truth is, we sometimes need to work against our natural presuppositions and give other sources a fair and reasoned hearing because it may be that the truth lies in that direction.

I Will Glory in my Redeemer

Posted on by
Reply

by Sovereign Grace Music

VERSE 1
I will glory in my Redeemer
Whose priceless blood has ransomed me
Mine was the sin that drove the bitter nails
And hung Him on that judgment tree
I will glory in my Redeemer
Who crushed the power of sin and death
My only Savior before the holy Judge
The Lamb who is my righteousness
The Lamb who is my righteousness

VERSE 2
I will glory in my Redeemer
My life He bought, my love He owns
I have no longings for another
I’m satisfied in Him alone
I will glory in my Redeemer
His faithfulness my standing place
Though foes are mighty and rush upon me
My feet are firm, held by His grace
My feet are firm, held by His grace

VERSE 3
I will glory in my Redeemer
Who carries me on eagles’ wings
He crowns my life with lovingkindness
His triumph song I’ll ever sing
I will glory in my Redeemer
Who waits for me at gates of gold
And when He calls me, it will be paradise
His face forever to behold
His face forever to behold

True? False? or Who Cares? (Part 2)

Posted on by
Reply

(Part 1 Can be found here)

How do we know what is true and what is false in everyday life? Isn’t it true that most of us don’t know things from firsthand experience, but rather we learn them through other people who tell us or teach us about truth? For example, where was Abraham Lincoln when he was shot? Or was he shot? Maybe he died of a heart attack. How do we know these things? We don’t know any of this by having seen it with our own eyes. We don’t even know because we personally did hours upon hours of research to find out. Most of us know because someone, probably a teacher in school, and the textbooks we used, told us what happened to Abraham Lincoln.

Most of us who use math at the every-day level don’t know the truths underlying the math, although we probably could. For example, most people don’t know from personal investigation how fractions and common denominators work. But if we use them at all, we were taught how to work with fractions, and we know that the methods work, and that is good enough for us. But my point is that we didn’t learn it from personal investigation and discovery. We believe these principles because people we trusted, and who we assumed were authorities, taught us, and what they taught us works.

What is interesting to me is how and why we choose the people we decide to believe. In elementary school and probably through most of high school we believed what we were told by our parents and teachers. But as we grew older, we began to distinguish one opinion from another, and we began to argue and debate whether what we were being told was true or not. What matters to me is how we decide who to believe when we receive conflicting messages. Politics is a good case in point. Someone on TV says that the reason we are in the economic mess we are in is because we are spending billions on unnecessary wars. (This article was first written in 2013.) There are really two messages there: 1) the economic mess is caused by the wars, and 2) the wars were unnecessary. The purpose of this article is not to delve into the politics, but to observe that people on each side of the argument will rant for hours on their point of view. How do they know the economic problems are caused by the war expenditures? How do the people on the other side know that it was not the wars that caused the economic problems? Have any of these people looked at the numbers, compared the graphs, and analyzed all of the factors? No! We mostly listen to what people tell us. For some reason each one of us has a propensity to believe one explanation of events rather than another. In this particular example, some believe war caused the mess and some do not. These beliefs are based on who we have decided to listen to and who we believe. Why do we believe one source rather than another? Do we have any factual reason for doing so, or are we going by feelings?

I think the current debate over the Coronavirus is another similar situation. Some say the President and his team are doing a great job in handling the crisis. The other side says he should have started earlier, he shouldn’t have shut down the economy, etc. Here again, I think that very few of us actually know. We have chosen which news sources we believe because we are drawn to their arguments, but it’s hard to actually get to the truth. Most of us don’t analyze the graphs, we aren’t epidemiologists, we don’t know how viruses work. Truth is out there, but it is hard to get at.

Shouldn’t we be interested in truth? What is the truth? In many cases we could know if we took the time to do the research. Take historical events for example. I brought up Abraham Lincoln a moment ago. How does one know he was assassinated? I’m not a philosopher nor a historian so this is not a rigorous academic treatise, but it seems to me that to verify historic events, which no one living now witnessed, we need to go back to original documents, news reports, photographs, etc., and put together the best scenario we can as to what actually happened. This takes a lot of time – more time than we have if we are trying to determine the truth about everything we hear. So, we decide who we will believe and base our opinions on what they say.

These methods of determining truth pretty much work for day to day living. But the possibility exists that we have chosen to believe things which are not true simply because of who we listen to. We need to be open to the possibility that what we believe might be false. We need to be ready to discuss our ideas, and to probe other people’s ideas, and to give and receive facts and arguments in order to get at the truth. The problem is that today several things stand in the way of discussions of this sort. We’ll discuss these in more detail later, but basically discussions of truth end because 1) People don’t really care what the truth is – it doesn’t matter; 2) Truth is felt at the emotional level and so if it feels correct, it must be true no matter what the facts say; 3) Truth can’t be known so why bother talking about it; and 4) Truth doesn’t exist.

My main focus in these articles is to focus on religious truth, specifically the truth of Christianity and the implications. But, as I do that, I also want you to begin thinking about all truth claims you hear, whether in the realm of politics, advertising, advice about health, etc. Why do you believe what you believe and how do you know you’re listening to the people that are telling you the truth? But, in future articles I want us to think about how we as Christians get at the truth of Christianity, and why we believe it is true. I want us to think about the implications of saying that it is true. I also want us to see how the four hindrances to seeking truth even impact our understanding of the Bible and the differences of opinion among us.

True? False? or Who Cares? (Part 1)

Posted on by
Reply

Several years ago, I listened to an interview of Dallas Willard by Ken Meyers. Dr. Willard is a professor of philosophy at University of Southern California. The interview was part of Volume 100 of an audio journal series published by Mars Hill Audio. (http://www.marshillaudio.org)

In the interview, Dr. Willard compared “profession”, “commitment”, “faith”, and “knowledge”. What interested me is that he said that in religion, we often emphasize profession and commitment without the foundation of faith based on knowledge. This might all seem too philosophical, but I think there are some important things for us non-philosophers to think about here. In normal pursuits of life there is such a thing as truth which can be known.

In virtually every area of normal life we know that there are some truths which can be known and taught. Then, when these truths are believed and acted upon, individuals, workers, and organizations can be committed to the policies and procedures that are based on this knowledge, and they can then profess that they can accomplish certain goals.

All of this normal thinking has broken down, however, when it comes to beliefs about religion, morals, and the like. We are told that there is no truth that can be known. Everyone’s opinion is as good as anyone else’s. Does this even make any sense?

I believe we need to think through all truth claims. For example, I saw a bumper sticker once that said, “The earth does not belong to us. We belong to the earth.” Is this true? How could we know? Does someone really believe this? It is certainly a profession of some sort. I wonder if the people who own the car are committed to this statement in their everyday life.

Every day of our lives we and others make statements about things we believe are true. In some cases, it doesn’t matter if there is truth behind our beliefs or not. In other situations, it’s crucial to know the truth that underlies our beliefs. If I’m going to have brain surgery to remove a tumor, my life depends on whether those who are going to operate know that there is a tumor there and know how to get to it and remove it safely. I certainly don’t want them to operate on me if they just profess that they know how to do it without actually knowing how. Similarly, if someone is going to rewire my home, I want them to know how electricity works and the facts that govern the proper wiring of a home.

Everything seems to change when it comes to religion and religious belief and profession. In our day, truth and knowing are under attack. For some, the whole concept that there is religious truth is absurd. For others, the problem is more the question of how one can know what is true. For these people, it’s not the existence of truth that is the problem, but that it seems impossible to them that we can know what the truth is. Both thinking there is no truth, and thinking truth can’t really be known, generate a level of skepticism that makes it almost impossible to have a normal conversation about religion and religious truth.

As a Christian, I was intrigued by Dr. Willard’s idea that often within Christianity we have begun to focus on profession or commitment without these being based on knowledge of the truth. In earlier times, churches grounded their members in what was at least purported to be the truth. They taught these truths to their constituents so that they had a knowledge of them, could believe them, develop commitments to them, and as a result, profess them.

These days, in many religious congregations, the idea that there is truth that can be known and believed has almost disappeared. In some other congregations where the idea of truth undergirds their teaching, the grounding and reinforcement that these things are truly true is lacking. When we simply have as our goal commitment and profession and put them first without the foundation of knowledge of truth, those commitments and professions will not last long. In addition, without the belief that there is such a thing as truth or that truth can be known, it’s impossible to subject one’s own belief or the beliefs of others to any sort of scrutiny or discussion. Personal growth and communication with others are stifled. As a result, the idea of sharing the gospel with others in order to bring them to faith in Christ seems more and more antiquated, because we’re trying to say we believe in something that is true. Many people don’t have any idea what that means.

Let’s go back to the narrative I presented at the beginning. Is it true that “the earth does not belong to us but rather we belong to the earth?” I might propose a bumper sticker that says, “The earth is the Lord’s.” Is one bumper sticker true and the other one false or are they both false? Maybe they are both true. Could they be? Does it matter? Maybe they’re just words and they don’t mean anything. If there is no truth, or truth cannot be discovered, then we can say whatever we want, and all statements are equally valid … or equally invalid.

However, if truth exists and it can be known, then what we say does matter. We can have discussions or even arguments about what is true and what is false. We can make decisions as to what beliefs to abandon and what beliefs to adopt based on their truth or falsity. When leaders try to lead us in a given direction, we have the foundation we need to discern truth from error. Otherwise we are just lead around like dumb animals babbling feelings and platitudes that mean nothing.

We are going to discuss this further in upcoming posts, but let me encourage you to apply the same principles in religious discussion as you do in the rest of life. There is truth. You may not know it all but it’s there. Some religious statements are true. Some are false. You need to find out which are which because your future well-being depends on knowing the truth.

Part 2 is here.

God’s Righteousness Demands Justice

Posted on by
Reply

My devotions have taken me into the book of Ezekiel. Without question this is one of the strangest and most difficult books in the Bible to read and understand. There are descriptions of wheels within wheels with eyes all around. The words create the image of flying saucers in my mind. But it is obvious that the main point of the book is that God is fed up with the sinfulness of His people.

In Ezekiel 9, the prophet sees a vision of some men, one of whom has an inkhorn. God tells him to go into all the city of Jerusalem and put an ink mark on the forehead of all those who “sigh and cry over all the abominations that are done” within the city. So he obeys and marks the foreheads.

Then other men are told to basically go out into the city and kill all of those who do not have the mark. It reminds me of the Exodus where God rescued all those who had the blood on their doorposts.

A couple of things struck me right away. First, this kind of incident is not going to sit well with people of the 21st century. The killing of all these “innocent” men, women, and children seems gross and excessive. But on the other hand, we Christians have always taught that the wages of sin is death. Do we really believe that?

But wait! What was the sin of these people? The people who were slain were those who were not sighing and crying over all of the abominations being done within the city of Jerusalem. Not sighing or crying over wickedness is a sin? I thought sins were things like murder, rape, and other forms of brutality. But what does it mean when the Bible says that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”? God laments the sinfulness of people and all of the abominations that mankind does, especially if these deeds are being done by His own people. If we were godly, we would sorrow too, … wouldn’t we? I was struck by how very far short I fall below God’s standard of holiness!

What keeps God from going out now and executing all of us who are lacking in our sorrow over sin in our country or in our churches? Isn’t this where the gospel comes in? Jesus came here and died on the cross to pay the penalty for our sin. That’s what we preach, right? But what does that mean? It means that Jesus took my sin of not sighing and crying upon Himself. In effect that means that Jesus was blamed by God for not crying or sighing over the sins of our cities and churches. And because of that guilt, God executed Him on the cross, just as the men in Ezekiels’ time were executed for that very same crime.

What about me? When we trust Christ as our savior, God gives us Christ’s righteousness in replacement for our own meager and sometimes phony efforts at righteous living. When God looks at me, He sees me as having been perfectly mournful over the sins of my city and my church. Why? Because Jesus is perfectly mournful and I have been given credit for that righteous attitude.

We can’t look at someone who has been brutal and violent and feel superior. We all are guilty of capital offenses against God. But God in His mercy and grace offers us a free, unearned pardon through His Son Jesus Christ. I’ve taken Him up on that offer. It was too good to turn down. What about you?

Behold Our God

Posted on by
Reply

Who has held the oceans in his hands?
Who has numbered every grain of sand?
Kings and nations tremble at his voice
All creation rises to rejoice

Behold our God, seated on his throne
Come, let us adore him
Behold our king, nothing can compare
Come, let us adore him

Who has given counsel to the Lord?
Who can question any of his words?
Who can teach, the one who knows all things?
Who can fathom all his wondrous deeds?

Behold our God, seated on his throne
Come, let us adore him
Behold our king, nothing can compare
Come, let us adore him

Who has felt the nails upon his hands?
Bearing all the guilt of sinful man
God eternal, humbled to the grave
Jesus, Savior, risen now to reign

Behold our God, seated on his throne
Come, let us adore him
Behold our king, nothing can compare
Come, let us adore him

Technology and Sexual Temptation

Posted on by
Reply

            As Christians we believe that the Bible is God’s word to man, and a Christian man who is trying to be faithful to his Lord will try to govern his life according to God’s will as given in the Bible.

            The purpose of this series of articles has been to examine the relationship between technology and the Christian. In this last section I want to look at the issue of technology and sexual temptation. However, I think that in order to explain the sexual implications of technology I need to lay the groundwork of a few principles from the Bible that I’m assuming in this discussion.

            The first thing we need to remember is that God created sex and sexuality. Sex in itself is not a dirty or vulgar thing. It is a God-given gift. Next, we need to remember that God has told us in Scripture that sex is to be enjoyed, but that enjoyment is to be within the relationship of marriage between a man and a woman. All through the Bible the rightful sexual relationship within marriage is praised and held up as a joyful thing, not as a vulgar thing.

            After Adam sinned, man’s nature became sinful in all areas of his being and strong desires, which the Bible calls lusts, began to have a dominant force in a person’s life. The Bible says that the strong desires of the body (or the flesh as the Bible describes it), the strong desires coming through our vision, and the pride of life, are not from God the Father, but are part of the world system. (I John 2:16)    These strong desires are very difficult to overcome, and without the Spirit of God at work, it’s almost impossible.

            When a person comes to Christ, God gives him His Spirit and divine power to enable him to overcome these desires and to live a life that pleases God. We need to recognize that God has given us commands and directives because He is the one who created us, and He knows best what is good for our well-being. We should never look at the commandments of God as though they were meant to spoil our fun. When we buy a product, a manufacturer will enclose a list of instructions that show the proper way to use the device. For example, we are perhaps not supposed to use the device in the water. It may cause damage to the device or injury to us. These are rules written by the ones who know best how things are supposed to work. The same is true of God’s rules for us.

            The Bible describes sexual sin with several different terms. One term, porneia, is used for any sexual sin that is outside of the norm and standard that God designed.  The Greek word I referred to here you will recognize as the root word for our word pornography. Another Greek term is translated adultery and usually refers to sexual sin committed by a married person. Another couple of terms refer to sexual sin as uncleanness or lewdness. God uses all of these words to describe sins whereby we violate God’s standard for our sexual behavior.

            Let’s look at some of the descriptions the Bible lays out. Let’s start with what Jesus actually said. In Mark 7:21 Jesus, speaking about the fact that sin comes from within a man, says, “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality (porneia, fornication),…adultery, …sensuality (lewdness, sexual excess). All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” Notice a couple of things here. First of all, they come from within. The Bible says that the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked (Jeremiah 17:9). So the source of our difficulty is not from the outside, but is from within. James writes that “each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.”

            Next we see that Jesus describes these actions as evil. Most of what happens sexually in our culture is not considered evil by most people. The Bible has a different approach.  It makes a clear-cut statement that sexual immorality is to be avoided and shunned.  Lastly, we notice that they defile a person. We defile ourselves from what comes from within ourselves. Defilement means we make ourselves dirty and unfit for service for God

            Paul, writing to the Romans in 13:13 says, “Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality (free and easy sex) and sensuality.”  In the next verse he tells us to make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.”  In other words, we should not make it easy to serve our lusts. Paul writes similar things to the Corinthians in 2 Corinthians 12:21.

            To the Ephesians in 5:3 he writes, “But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking which are out of place. Be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.”  In other words, God’s wrath is coming because people engage in these behaviors. Why would we as Christians want to be a participant?

            Finally, let’s look at what the Apostle Peter wrote in his first letter. In 4:2 he says that we should live “no longer for human passions but for the will of God. The time that is past suffices for doing what the Gentiles want to do, living in sensuality (lewdness, sexual excess), passions, drunkenness, orgies, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry.”  He is basically saying that we need to put our past behavior behind us and live for God from here on out. And the life we live for God is different from the description of our past life. Christians don’t behave the same as non-Christians when it comes to sexuality.

            With that background in mind, how does technology fit into the picture? Technology, whether it is TV, video, or Internet based, can bring us realistic portrayals of sexual situations that in turn trigger the strong sexual desires that are built into us. With men, the strong desires that are aroused through what we see can be very powerful. The Bible calls these lusts. These lusts then can give rise to sin if not dealt with.

            Jesus tells us that, “whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Matthew 5:28. From this simple statement, we can see that Jesus’ standard is very high. If we are to avoid this kind of potential sexual sin, we need to take precautions.  Jesus’ very next statement is to say that if our eye offends us, we should pluck it out. Now we could debate whether he was serious, or whether he was using hyperbole to prove a point, but nevertheless, it’s obvious he takes this very seriously, and we should take whatever precautions we can to avoid this sort of sinning. The Apostle Peter wrote to his readers, “I beg you to abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul.” (I Peter 2:11) Peter knew that lusts and strong desires can actually make war against our very souls. We are to abstain from such lusts. They can harm us deep within our psyche. Paul told Timothy to flee from such lusts. So the admonition for us is to do whatever we can to avoid situations that produce these self-destructive lusts and enable them to flourish.

            The problem with lust is that it is never satisfied. Sexual immorality of all kinds promises that it will meet the inner longings of our souls, but it never does. We are trapped into an ever-deepening desire for more, and the satisfaction we derive from our sin becomes less and less. God’s secret to happiness is what Jesus taught the people in the Sermon on the Mount—Happy is the man who hungers and thirsts for righteousness.  While this seems totally foreign to the modern mind, it is God’s way of finding satisfaction. Do we believe God or the world system? Our direction and focus need to be toward a life of righteousness.

            In Ephesians 5:10, Paul tells us that we should find out what pleases the Lord. In verse 11 he tells us not to have any fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, and then in verse 12 he explains that it is shameful to even speak about things which are done by them in secret.  In other words, there are things that displease God that people do in secret, and it’s shameful for Christians to even speak about these things. But isn’t this what happens when we view certain scenes on TV or over the Internet? Aren’t we looking in on what people are doing or talking about in secret?

            So let’s take these ideas and put them together. We as Christians are to avoid the immorality that is initiated in our minds by the things which we see, and we are to not even talk about the kinds of things that people do under the cover of darkness or in secret. Focusing our attention on these things can trigger strong desires that war on our souls and do great spiritual damage.

            So what does that tell us about TV viewing for example? Doesn’t this mean that we should take every precaution in our viewing to avoid those programs and commercials that either trigger immoral thoughts in our minds, or display or discuss immoral activities in detail?  In this case, I’m not even talking about pornography. I’m just suggesting that we take great care not to become careless and accustomed to immorality and casual sexual content because in doing so, our own minds can become fertile ground for imagined sexual activity that Jesus condemns.

            If these things are true, then what does that say about actual pornography? There’s no question that exposure to graphic sexual material will produce strong sexual lusts in our minds and in our bodies that we cannot legitimately act upon from God’s point of view. This being the case, we as Christian men need to take every precaution to avoid getting ourselves into the trap that pornography represents.

            Technology itself can be addicting as we have discussed before. When you add pornography to the technology, you have a powerful mix. The Bible often speaks of diligence when it comes to the Christian life. It takes a great deal of diligence to avoid the entrapping nature of pornography. What are some of the things we can do to avoid the trap?

            First, I think we need to look at our lives to see if we really have the desire to live a life that is honoring to God no matter what the cost. This is where a lot of it falls down. We may claim that we are Christians, and we very well may be, but we don’t really want to sacrifice the time and attention that it takes to live a consistent, biblical, righteous Christian life. We may enjoy our sin too much! We may believe that God isn’t really interested in our good if He would withhold all of these things from us and ask us to live such a narrow life. So we need to make up our minds. Do we want a God-honoring life or not?

            Second, we need to look at our personal spiritual disciplines carefully. Are we regularly taking the time to pray? Are we reading, studying, and meditating on the Scriptures regularly? Are we regularly involved with other Christians in fellowship, prayer, and ministry? If not, we are making ourselves vulnerable in many areas including our sexuality. If you are weak in any of these areas, take immediate steps to improve. Start today by getting in the Word and taking time to pray. Don’t make any excuses to miss church on Sunday. If there’s a church prayer meeting going on somewhere near you, be there.

            In addition to making sure our Christian life is being supported the way it needs to be, here are some other steps you can take to increase accountability and provide protection for yourself and your family.

1. Make sure TV viewing is open and public within the home. Children should not have televisions in their rooms where they can watch what they want without supervision.

2. If you live alone and can’t control what you watch, get rid of the TV. If you can’t handle the Internet, have it disconnected (Remember Jesus telling us to pluck out our eye or cut off our arm?)

3. Computer use should be open and public within the home—for everyone. Children should not have computers with Internet access or DVD capabilities in their rooms. They may fight you on this and tell you what every other child gets to have, but that’s ok. We are Christians who desire to please God, and so we have different procedures.

4. Husbands, give your wife complete access to your computer, your browsing history, your Facebook passwords… everything. Ask your wife to keep you accountable.

5. Establish an accountability partner who has your permission to ask you anything he wants about your viewing and browsing habits.

6. If necessary, sign up for a filtering service that will email your browsing history to your wife or an accountability person.

7. Under no circumstances should teenagers have a smart phone. That sounds radical, I know, but why do any of us have to have access to the Internet 24/7? Do you honestly think a 16-year-old boy can keep away from pornography if he has Internet access on his phone wherever he is? Think about it! If your son wants to know why you don’t trust him, explain that you don’t even trust yourself.

In conclusion, we realize that developments in technology will continue. We have no way of knowing what the future will bring, and what kinds of devices we will have to adjust to in the years ahead. But know this, we must live for the glory of God in all areas of life, and technology is one of those areas that needs to be brought under the Lordship of Christ. We need to be discerning, and we need to pass on discernment skills to our children, so they won’t be overwhelmed by the alluring, addicting devices that are sure to come. Let’s pray earnestly and ask God for the wisdom we all will need to live lives that are pleasing to Him in all areas.