1. A Right Approach (1. PDF Print Version)
2. National Service (2. PDF Print Version)
3. Racism (3. PDF Print Version)
4. War and Peace (4. PDF Print Version)
5. Civil Disobedience & Revolution (5. PDF Print Version)
6. Trade Unionism (6. PDF Print Version)
7. Capital Punishment (7. PDF Print Version)
8. Marriage (8. PDF Print Version)
9. Divorce and Remarriage (9. PDF Print Version)
10. Homosexuality (10. PDF Print Version)
11. Transvestism (11. PDF Print Version)
12. Abortion (12. PDF Print Version)
13. Infanticide & Euthanasia (13. PDF Print Version)
14. Suicide (14. PDF Print Version)
15. Genetic Engineering (15. PDF Print Version)
16. Contraception (16. PDF Print Version)
17. Drug Taking (17. PDF Print Version)
18. Alcoholism (18. PDF Print Version)
19. Cremation (19. PDF Print Version)
20. Demons And The Occult (20. PDF Print Version)
21. Lifestyle (21. PDF Print Version)
_________________________________________________________________
Study 1: A Right Approach (Ps 119:97-112)
o Christian Ethics is an established branch of theological studies.
– The words “ethical” and “moral” are often used interchangeably. “Moral” emphasises the character of the doer, “ethical” the actions. They are inseparable, for whether the action is ethical or not (right or wrong) will reflect on the character of the person, where he is righteous or not.
– Our purpose is practical, not academic. We focus on specific issues and cases, rather than on values, tendencies, or history of Christian ethics. Our aim is to provide guidance for action, and training in making decisions. The Reformers taught that the moral law (summarised in the Ten Commandments) does not save sinners, but saved sinners should keep it. The Puritans recognised the need to provide believers with moral guidance in specific cases of conscience, e.g Richard Baxter’s “Christian Directory.”
I. The authority of the Bible.
1. Evangelicals believe that Scripture is the only infallible and inerrant rule of faith and practice.
– Human reason, church tradition, social customs, and the natural sciences (e.g. Biology, Physics), and the social sciences (e.g. anthropology, history) may aid moral reflection, but they cannot form the ultimate basis of our actions.
2. How does the Bible teach God’s will?
– Specific commands are commands directly applicable to us today, e.g. “Do not commit adultery” (Ex 20:14), “Love one another as i have loved you”(Jn 15:12), and “Abstain from every form of evil” (1 Thess 5:22).
– Precepts guide us in our conduct and actions, e.g. “Whatever is not from faith is sin,” and “Bodily exercise profits a little, but godliness is profitable for all things” (1 Tim 4:8).
– Principles have crucial implications for us, e.g. the sacredness of human life (Gen 1:26, 28).
– Examples are binding on us unless unique to the persons or situation of the time, e.g. tithing in the OT, Paul’s approach to missions.
– A biblical world view is provided by foundational truths concerning the nature of God, man,
good and evil, and the meaning and destiny of human life, which help us assess the various data of human sciences.
3. Our aim is to determine what is prescriptive, not just descriptive, what is obligatory, not personal opinions and preferences and feelings.
– Too many Christians have imbibed a liberal attitude: “That is your interpretation/opinion.” Others have attempted to minimise the prescriptive element of biblical teaching by vague and general appeals to “faith” and “love.” But faith in God cannot be divorced from submission
to His will, love for the Lord cannot be separated from obeying His commands (1 Sam 15:22-23; Jn 14:21).
II. Applying biblical principles.
1. Good principles and good facts are both necessary for sound decision making. The Bible provides us with the principles/teaching, while the facts of the situation must be correctly and fully known. The teaching of the Bible must then be applied to the situation.
– Human reason has a legitimate role in extending the general principles of Scripture to similar situations not explicitly addressed in the Bible (1689:1:6). For example, drug abuse is not explicitly addressed in the Bible but 1 Cor 6:19-20 is relevant.
– Human reason, being impaired by sin, cannot serve as another authority to that of Scripture. After seeking and examining all the relevant facts, we need to interpret those facts with a mind renewed by the Holy Spirit, and within the framework controlled by the teachings of Scripture.
2. In a sinful world, believers occasionally find themselves faced with conflicting ethical obligations, e.g. Peter had to decide whether to obey the governing authorities or God (Acts 5:27-29); Rahab received the Israelite spies and had to decide between telling the truth or preserving life (Josh 2).
– Given such a situation, do we always do what is right before God, or choose the lesser of two evils? Advocates of “situation ethics” teach the adoption of any action that accords with “love.” Biblical rules and principles are cast aside. Everything depends on the individual’s definition of love, or his opinion of what constitutes the most loving course of action. It is actually relativism, and incipient antinomianism.
– In contrast, “contextual absolutism” holds that in each and every ethical situation, no matter how extreme, there is a course of action that is morally right and free of sin (1 Cor 10:13). There is no such thing as “the lesser of two evils.” Occasionally, a higher obligation suspends
a lower one, e.g. Peter chose to obey God rather than men. (See also Ex 1:15-17 and Daniel 3:17-18.) In the case of Rahab, the definition of a lie is crucial. In the context of war, and with her new allegiance to the God of Israel, she had no obligation to tell everything to the soldiers. In the NT, Rahab is cited as an example of faith (James 2:25). She is nowhere condemned in the Scripture. Her actions, rather than being the lesser of two evils, were actually good.
3. In upholding contextual absolutism, great wisdom is needed to determine what is right and
wrong. We need to pray for such wisdom. This wisdom is not unconnected with a daily life of
obedience to God’s word.
– Also, we must be prepared to suffer for the faith, and even martyrdom (cf. 1 Pet. 2:21-22; Dan. 3:17-18).
= May God give us grace, as we seek to know His will, and to obey.
Questions
1. Is there anything wrong with smuggling Bibles & Christian books into a closed country? What about bribing government officials to get visas for missionaries?
2. Is it possible to reconcile “the lesser of two evils” approach with “contextual absolutism”?
3. Can you think of other difficult “cases of conscience”?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 2: National Service (Acts 10:24-48)
o Conscription doing wartime is one thing, military training for the citizens during peacetime is another. The term “National Service” is used in reference to such peacetime programmes. Malaysia introduced NS for a time, and intends to introduce a revised version in the future.
– How are we to view NS, and respond accordingly? How should we prepare our youths/children
for NS?
I. What it is all about.
1. Many countries have laws that permit the governments to enlist the citizens for national service when there is an emergency. South Korea which is officially still at war with N. Korea has such official conscription of their male citizens.
– What we consider here is NS during peacetime, in which laws are enacted to require compulsory military-style training, including the handling of weapons, rescue and medical aid, logistics and other supportive services.
- Singapore, compulsory military training is required of all male youths (barring exemptions on medical ground) before they enter into university. Israel conscripts both males and females. UK abolished peacetime conscription, while Switzerland decided to keep theirs.
2. Malaysia introduced a version of National Service programme from 2003 to 2016, which was officially abolished on 13 August 2018.
– When introduced, the declared aim was to overcome the perceived racial polarisation and lack of patriotism among the youths.
: The concept of “vision schools”was started in which Malay, Chinese and Tamil schools are built
on the same location, sharing in common the playground, the canteen, the school halls, and also
various activities such as sports day and the weekly assembly.
: NS was also introduced for youths of 18 years old. Due to the high cost and insufficient facilities,
only those selected were required to join.
– The NS programme has been criticised for its high budget, with occasional reports of food poisoning, sexual assault, and poorly maintained facilities. At least 23 youth were killed in accidents and by diseases during these NS stints.
: The BTN (National Civics Bureau) was involved in part of the training. The BTN, however, had
had a bad reputation of propagating the racial agenda of the previous Umno-led Barisan Nasional
government for years. The BTN was abolished at the same time as the NS in 2018.
– A new programme is in the process of being created to replace the NS and the BTN, which aims to be inclusive, transparent, and free from political and racial elements.
II. What the Bible says about citizenship and civil authorities.
1. It is right to be patriotic and to show our patriotism.
God, in His providence, places us in certain families and certain countries (Acts 17:26). The circumstances of life are ordered by God. We must not fret about our circumstances but aim to live well to God’s glory, wherever we live (cf. Lev. 24:22).
– As citizens, we may appeal to our rights (Acts 16:35-39; 22:25; 25:11). At the same time, we must fulfil our responsibilities as law-abiding citizens, paying taxes and contributing to the community, including NS (Rom. 13:6-7; Mark 12:17).
– The government and country may not be what we wish it to be, but no country on earth is perfect. As a general rule, we should engage rather than retreat, in order to make the situation better (Matt. 5:13, 14, 16). We would abstain from every form of evil (1 Thess. 5:22) when we are able to do so, and when we are certain of the evil.
– In the case of Daniel and his friends, they unable to flee from captivity and the idolatry. Instead, they used ways that were lawful to boldly and persistently challenge the situation to make it better. Some of us may be called to positions of great influence, e.g. as politicians, newspaper reporters/editors, and teachers. Use your positions to glorify God (1 Cor 10:31).
2. It is right submit ourselves to the governing authorities except when this conflicts with our faith.
– Civil government is ordained by God for our good, whatever form it takes (Rom 13:1, 5-7; 1 Pet 2:13-17).
– There are times when we must obey God rather than men (Acts 4:18-20; 5:27-29). We must be prepared to accept the adverse consequences, and count it a blessing to suffer for Christ’s sake (Acts 5:40; 1 Pet 4:13-16).
– It is not required that a Christian cease to be in the army (Luke 3:14; 7:9; Acts 10:1-2, 22). It is right to engage in a just war (see later study).
III. Our response to NS.
1. There is nothing evil about military training. It becomes evil only when wrongly used. In our situation, this element is toned down for political reasons.
– Apart from military training, there are other aspects of NS which are beneficial, e.g. training in discipline, teamwork, first-aid, physical fitness, etc. The aim is noble and good, viz. preparing the citizens to be combat-ready, to be united, and to be patriotic. Which of these components are emphasised is besides the point. Our concern is with the methods used, and whether there are hidden agendas, e.g. political or religious indoctrination.
2. NS has its benefits upon our children.
– On the personal level: They will learn to keep regular time, to be punctual, to obey orders, to submit to lawful authorities. The physical fitness emphasised will be good for them if maintained after NS.
- On the social level: They will learn to live with others, “to give and take” without compromising principles, to make friends who will be of help in days ahead.
– On the spiritual level: There is opportunity to bear witness for Christ, both by actions and by words. We are to look upon others with compassion instead of as rivals, to be friendly and cooperative, stand our ground nicely and firmly when principles are at stake.
3. Churches and parents should prepare the children to face NS.
– Family worship, regular attendance in church, and the years of imparting values to them will
stand them in good stead.
- Pray for them, and learn to commit them to God’s care. They will soon have to leave home and live their own life.
= Fighting against the system with no good reasons will not help us. Sending forth our children to NS with hesitation will not help them. Encouraging them to go forth willingly and with trust in the Lord, and assuring them of our love and prayer, will help them tremendously.
Questions
1. Some children are not outgoing or the outdoor type. How would you advise them, & the parents?
2. What should we do if our children are exposed to religious indoctrination by the authorities?
3. How would you handle the situation if NS disrupts your education?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 3: Racism (Rom. 5:12-21)
o Definitions:
– Racism is prejudice against others based on belief in the superiority of one’s own race.
– Racialism is thoughts/ actions/policies based on, or connected with, differences in race.
– Communalism is thoughts/ actions/policies based on, or connected with, groups or communities (not necessarily ethnic).
o A communalist may be accused of being selfish. A racialist may be accused of being unfair. A
racist may be accused of being arrogant.
– Apartheid and the enslavement of blacks were expression of racism. The affirmative actions in
Malaysia may be regarded as racialism. The Chinese educationists in Malaysia, who fight to
exercise the right of having Chinese schools, may be regarded as communalists.
– In real life, it is possible to be a communalist without being a racialist or racist, but it is difficult
to be a racialist without being racist to some extent (i.e. having thoughts of prejudice against
others while thinking one’s own race is better in some ways).
– For our purpose, we define racism as prejudice (ill-feelings) against others based on grounds of
ethnic background, regardless of the cause (whether a sense of superiority, inferiority, economic
deprivation, educational backwardness, fear, insecurity, or hatred).
I. The reality of racism.
Racism is now frowned upon everywhere, but it remains a problem among pockets of people around the world, e.g. “white supremacy” in America, dislike of Asians in Australia.
– In Malaysia, politics is played along communal lines, government policies are implemented along communal lines and religious lines. It will take a while before these can be eliminated.
– On the personal level, there are those who feel happy when the victims of some disaster are people of another community, prices of goods are declared higher for customers of another ethnic group, and one will buy from shops operated only by those from the same ethnic group. Racial polarisation among the young people has been acknowledged as becoming more pronounced.
2. Traditionally, some Christians had justified racism by the misuse of Scriptures.
– The curse of Noah (Gen. 9:25) was used to teach the perpetual subjection of black people to the whites. But the curse fell on Canaan, not Ham. It was fulfilled in Joshua 9, in the subjection of the Canaanites by Israel.
– Arguments from slavery in the Bible were used, e.g. “What God approved in the OT and sanctioned in the NT cannot be sin.” But this seriously misrepresented the biblical position. God tolerated evils like slavery, polygamy, divorce and war without implying the desirability of such things. The NT provides the basis for the abolition of slavery (Gal 3:38; 1 Cor 7:21-23; 12:12-13; Philem. 16; 1 Jn 2:9-11).
– Since God has determined national boundaries (Acts 17:26), mixed marriage was frowned upon, apartheid was justified, and racial discrimination in immigration laws were regarded as a God-given right. But the context shows that God made one human race, which historically was scattered by divine judgement, with the intention that salvation will come to all nations.
– “Turning the other cheek” (Mt 5:39; 1 Pet 2:20) was used to teach that injustice must be passively accepted. But note that the Lord and the apostle were both identified with the sufferers of injustice, and they were teaching that any thought of vengeance was to be avoided. In fact, any servile, slavish attitude is condemned in Scripture (2 Cor 11:20; Acts 16:37; Exod. 5:21).
3. Thank God, there were those who had cared deeply about social and racial issues at great
personal cost, e.g. George Whitefield, John Newton and William Wilberforce against slavery; C H
Spurgeon and George Muller who built orphanages; Lord Shaftsbury and the Clapham Sect who
fought for social reforms.
– Despite their efforts, and the changes that have come to the world, a biased culture prevails.
Christianity is still associated with the West, and the West with the white man. Anything white is
good — white for purity, white is beautiful, white lie. Anything black is bad — blackmagic,
blacklist, blackmail, black sheep, black book.
– The Scripture does not use colours in these ways. Red is in fact used for evil (Isa. 1:18; Rev. 12:3;
17:4).The metaphors of light and darkness are drawn from day and night, not colours. Skin colour
is part of God’s handiwork and both black and white are “very good” (Gen 1:31; Song 1:5).
II. Biblical principles.
1. The following are some of the relevant principles:
– We are all descended from Adam and Eve. The human race is one (one species).
: We all bear the image of God. All have the right to belong, to have, to be. Basic rights belong to everyone, whether human dignity, family life, education, housing, employment, leisure, and movement.
: We all are sinners. In God’s eyes, all have forfeited the right to draw near to Him. All are not righteous. All need God’s grace to be saved.
– The scattering of the human race was God’s judgement for the sin of pride, rebellion and connivance against God (Gen. 11:8 cf. 1:28; 9:1). Acts 17:26 must be understood in that light.
: Cultural differences are real, but not inherent ethnic characteristics (Tit 1:12).
– It is God’s will that all nations hear the gospel (Matt. 28:18-20).
: Most nations, ancient and modern, have been mixed communities. Given time, government policies (e.g. the adoption of Indonesian names, American idealism), and circumstances (e.g. improved transportation and communication, globalisation), new boundaries of differentiation will be drawn, e.g. along economic, social, or professional lines.
: Only in Christ will there be true oneness, the oneness desired by God (Eph 2:1-21; Gal. 3:28;
Acts 10:34-35). Christians are expected to show that they belong to one another. In both the OT
and NT, the restrictions to marriage are religious, not racial. There are no restrictions to marriage
for Christians, as long as it is “only in the Lord” (1 Cor 7:39; 2 Cor 6:14). There are, of course,
various factors to consider, e.g. compatibility, cultural differences, the Lord’s will, etc.
2. Every Christian has at least two roles: as a citizen and as an evangelist (Mt 5:13-14).
– As a Christian citizen, he has to be concerned with the laws and customs of his country, with
questions of justice, and with the weak, deprived, and oppressed. (Paul was a Jew, born in Tarsus,
and possessing Roman citizenship, Acts 22;22ff.) Support for oppression, resort to violence, and
selfish concern for one’s rights are clearly unchristian.
– As an evangelist, he must seek to share his faith in Christ. Man’s needs are not merely social and
material, but also spiritual (Matt 4:4; Acts 4:12). A Christian will want to safeguard the religious
liberty of others, without denying the uniqueness of Christ in word or action.
= Racism has no place in the life of the Christian. Do not allow bad experiences to condition our
view of other ethnic groups. Instead, show forth sincere compassion and acceptance of others, for
the sake of the gospel.
Questions
1. The roles of citizen and evangelist are not easily carried out. What are some of the reasons?
2. How would our witness for Christ be affected if we are not free from racism? How may we reach
out to other ethnic groups more effectively?
3. “Politically correct speech” can be carried too far. How are we to view words like “blacksheep” and “white lies”?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 4: War And Peace (Heb. 11:30-40)
o Since the beginning of the NT church, the question of war have troubled the Christian conscience.
Was service in the army of the Romans consistent with allegiance to Christ, the Prince of Peace?
– Today, many Christians are still plagued with the questions: Do the OT & NT have different
perspectives on war and peace? Is engaging in war right? Is it right for Christians to be in the
armed forces? Have the realities of modern nuclear war make pacifism a moral obligation to
Christians?
I. The morality of war.
1. All are agreed that the ultimate causes of war are not to be found in the economic and social circumstances, but within man himself (James 4:1).
– The belief in the unity of the Bible requires that we take the teaching of the OT & NT on war consistently, and not in contradiction. There were circumstances peculiar to each dispensation, which led to differing implementations, but the underlying principles on war and peace remain the same.
– Christian perspectives fall into two categories: the pacifist position (i.e. no war under all circumstances), and the just-war position (i.e. war is right under certain circumstances).
2. The pacifist position has a long history, stretching to the time when it was thought wrong to be in the Roman army. Many converts remained in the army, and those who left seemed to have been motivated by a desire to avoid the idolatrous rites connected with emperor worship, rather than by the wrongness of warfare. After the conversion of Constantine, the problem of pagan religion in the army was largely overcome.
– In the Middle Ages, the Waldenses condemned all war and the taking of human life, but eventually fought in defense of themselves. During the Reformation, Anabaptist groups such as the Swiss brethren and the Mennonites advocated pacifism. The Quaker movement, founded by George Fox in 1668 in Britain and was brought to America, also taught pacifism.
– The biblical basis of pacifism is found mainly in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:38-48): …turn the other cheek, …love your enemies, …be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.
: It is claimed that the people of God engaged in warfare in the OT as a concession to their
“hardness of heart,” just as for divorce (Mt 19:8). It is claimed that under the new covenant, the Christian’s weapon is the sword of the Spirit, the word of God (Eph 6:17).
: Christ death is seen as the supreme example of how Christians are to choose nonviolence, even at the price of great injustices. Non-violence and non-resistance is further bolstered by other scriptures, e.g. “…overcome evil with good” (Rom 12:17, 21), “…love is the fulfilment of the law” (Rom 13:10), “…Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example” (1 Pet 2:21).
3. The just-war position has been the dominant view among Christians, whether RC, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestant. It holds that under some circumstances the Christian may participate in war to preserve justice. Some but not all wars are morally justifiable.
– The OT clearly presupposes that warfare can be a legitimate activity for a believer, e.g. Abraham led a military expedition to rescue Lot (Gen 14:13-16 cf Rom 4:11-12; Heb 11:8-10); Joshua, the judges, and David engaged in wars that were clearly approved or even commanded by God. The NT does not see their actions as “hardness of heart,” but rather as demonstrations of faith (Heb 11:33-34).
: John the Baptist, the Lord, and Peter did not tell the soldiers who sought to enter the kingdom of God to leave the army, nor suggest that the military profession was incompatible with true repentance and faith in God (Lk 3:14; 7:9; Acts 10:2, 22).
: The apostle Paul teaches that the civil government is the servant of God “who does not bear the sword in vain” (Rom 13:4).
: Military images abound in the teaching of the NT, e.g. Eph 6:10ff. Although intended to teach spiritual truths, there is no indication of disapproval for the military, but the opposite is the case. In Rev 19:11, John saw nothing offensive in portraying the activities of the risen Lord in martial terms.
- The pacifist position is based largely on a literal interpretation of the Lord’s sayings in the Sermon on the Mount. It overlooks the use of hyperbole, e.g. the plucking out of the lustful eyes and the cutting off of the sinful hand (Mt 5:29-30). The turning of the other cheek, etc. concerns the attitude of the Christian under persecution and abuse, not a literal prescription of conduct.
: A literal interpretation of the Lord’s words in Lk 14:26 will contradict the teaching of 1 Tim 5:8, and the Lord’s reaction to abuse in John 18:22-23, and the reaction of Paul in Acts 23:1-5.
: A further difficulty with pacifist interpretation is its understanding of the ethical implications of the cross. It holds to the “exemplary” theory of the atonement (i.e. the life of Christ seen as an example for believers), but overlooks the penal, substitutionary aspects of the cross. The passive suffering of injustice on the cross should be balanced by the active vindication of divine justice in the resurrection.
: There are limits to the exemplary understanding of the life and death of Christ. As the unique Saviour, His life and death are unique and unrepeatable in design and purpose.
: There is also a confusion of public and private duties. As a private individual, considering my
own interests and standing before God, I may choose to literally turn the other cheek in the face of unjust aggression. When I stand in a relationship of guardianship to third parties – as a civil magistrate, a parent, or a husband – the responsibilities of Christian love have a different application. Because of my love and care, and out of concern for their lives and welfare, I must resist unjust aggression against them.
4. But what constitute a just war? Often, the individual soldier is not in a position to judge. It is up to the government/leaders to judge. But there are principles to guide us.
– The criteria for a just war are: (i) it must be declared by a legitimate authority, and not by private individuals; (ii) there must be a just cause; (iii) the cure (war) should not be worse than the disease (injustice); (iv) the exhaustion of all peaceful means; (iv) the right intent, viz. to secure justice and lasting peace.
– There are criteria to guide us once the war has been entered into; (i) the principle of proportionality, viz. that the use of force and violence must be limited in terms of military necessity; (ii) the principle of discrimination, viz. direct, intentional attacks on non-combatants are prohibited.
II. War and peace in the nuclear age.
1. It has been claimed that atomic and nuclear weapons, which can destroy mankind, makes pacifism mandatory to Christians.
– The Scripture indicates that the world will not be destroyed, and the human race annihilated, prior to Christ’s return. God has promised it after the flood (Gen 8:21-22). The Lord will be with His people to the end of the age (Mt 28:18-20). It is the will of the Father that all the elect will be called out by the gospel before the end comes (Mt 24:24). The earth, and the human race, will be around when the Lord returns (Lk 18:8).
2. It has been suggested that 2 Pet 3:10, 12 is a reference to the destruction and heat of nuclear weapons. But the use of cosmic language in regard to judgement is found in other passages, e.g. Joel 2:28-32 cf Acts 2:19-20; Ezek 32:6-8; Rev 6:12-17.
– Even if the language is taken literally, the destruction occurs at the return of Christ, and not before. Believers have no cause to fear for their safety, for the Lord will be present with them.
– This does not mean that those in a position to do so should not work for nuclear disarmament and peace. In fact, it is through such efforts that the Lord will preserve the world till He comes.
= The just-war position is the right one. Christians may work as magistrates, be in the army, and be
engage in just wars. Peace and nuclear disarmament/containment is a duty. There will be a time
when swords will be finally turned into plowshares, but we must meanwhile work for world peace.
Questions
1. War is never pleasant. The Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy and the Indian reformer Gandhi advocated peace, nonresistance, and nonviolence. How should Christians view the pacifist movement?
2. How, and when, would a Christian know whether a war is unjust? What may he do then? What about pre-emptive strikes – are there occasions when that is right and necessary?
3. How should the Great Commission condition the way we view the danger of wars?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 5: Civil Disobedience And Revolution (Rom 13:1-7)
o Civil disobedience has been defined as “a public, nonviolent, and conscientious act contrary to law, usually done with the intent to bring about a change in the policies or laws of the government.”
- For our purpose, we will include acts that are done privately against an unjust law, or laws that we believe are contrary to the teaching of the Bible e.g. “Bible smuggling,” worshipping “underground” in countries hostile to Christians, witnessing to all ethnic groups, the caning of our own children.
– Under what circumstances is civil disobedience permissible. When is it morally mandatory to disobey the existing authorities? By what criteria are we to decide when contemplating civil disobedience? May Christians be involved in a revolution?
I. The biblical and theological warrant.
1. The OT: The abiding principles underlying the events or actions must be sought.
– The Hebrew midwives disobeyed the king of Egypt and did not kill the newborn male children
of the Hebrew women (Ex 1:15-22). God approved the midwives’ decision (vv 20-21). The king had forbidden Israel to worship in the way God had commanded (Ex 4:23), put Israel into forced slavery (Ex 1:11-14), and refused Israel permission to leave the country (Ex 7:14, 22).
– Jeremiah suffered for advising the people to surrender to the Chaldeans rather than resist and be destroyed in the impending invasion (Jer. 38:1-6).
– Daniel and his friends refused to comply to King Nebuchadnezzar’s compulsory state religion (Dan 3:1, 12, 17-18; 6:7, 10).
2. The NT: The precepts and principles drawn out must be consistent with the overall teaching of Scripture.
– The Lord showed that the power of the state is limited by the authority of God when He said, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are
God’s” (Mt 22:21).
– Peter and the other apostles refused to obey the Sanhedrin’s order not to preach in the name of
Jesus, saying, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29 cf 4:19).
– Paul’s teaching concerning submission to the governing authority also implies clear limitations
upon the power of the rulers. The rulers are “God’s minister to you for good” (v 4).
3. Theologically speaking, no human authority is absolute. It is derived from God and is ultimately subject to God (John 19:11; Rom. 13:1).
– Scripture clearly recognises that not all human laws are just (Psalm 94:20-21).
– The apostle Paul also appeals to the conscience (Rom 13:5). This presupposes that human power is not the final court of appeal or arbiter of human action. God alone is (Acts 5:29).
– The early church resisted the state when it overstepped its bounds. In AD 165 Justin Martyr and his companions refused to obey the command of the emperor to sacrifice to pagan gods, saying, “Do what you will. For we are Christians and offeerr no sacrifice to idols.” They were beheaded.
II. Criteria to consider.
1. Objections to the concept of civil disobedience have largely been pragmatic, and not to the point.
– It has been argued that civil disobedience promote anarchy and disrespect for the law. There is
also the concern that it might increase the incidence of crime.
: While the negative impact must be considered, fundamental justice must not be sacrificed to
preserve the tranquility of the status quo. From the biblical point of view, fundamental justice
is a weightier issue than the preservation of mere external order and peace.
– It has been argued that Rom 13:1-7; Tit 3:1-2 and 1 Pet 2:13 teach submission to civil authorities.
: We have seen that a right understanding of these passages, and a consideration of other passages, show that there are limits to human authority.
: Furthermore, theses scriptures say “be subject”, which is different from “obey”. One can be subject to the authority in general, recognising its overall legitimacy, but refuse to comply with any law that is contrary to divine standards.
2. When is it mandatory to disobey the civil authority? - When the civil authority commands the believer to do what is contrary to Scripture (e.g. Exod. 1:15ff), or prohibits the believer from doing what is commanded by God (e.g. Acts 4:18).
3. The cases calling for civil disobedience may not be so clear and require the application of a number of other criteria.
– The law being resisted must be unjust and immoral, clearly contrary to the will of God.
- Legal means of changing the unjust situation should have been exhausted.
- There must be some likelihood of success, particularly when the intent is to produce changes in laws, institutions, and the prevailing situation. This should be evaluated in the light of possible evil effects, e.g. social disruption, promotion of lawlessness, loss of personal freedom,
responsibility to one’s family and other ministry commitments, etc.
– There must be a willingness to accept the penalty of resisting the authorities.
- As far as possible, the act of disobedience should be public rather than clandestine. Unlike the criminal, the conscientious objector does not seek to hide his actions from the authorities or the public. However, some activities, by their very nature, require that they be done in secret, e.g. worshipping “underground.”
III. The case for revolution.
1. What about revolution? When the ruling government has become obviously cruel and unjust, revolution may be necessary. God may use human instruments to judge wicked governments, e.g. Gideon, Barak, Samson (Heb. 11:32-34).
– In a potentially revolutionary situation, the key question is, “Who is the legitimate authority in the sight of God?” Gideon, and not the ruling Midianites, was the legitimate authority for the people of Israel (Judges 6).
Unlike justified war, the “aggressor” is the existing government itself, rather than some external power.
– Unlike civil disobedience, violent means are employed to oust what is now regarded as an illegitimate government. The ruling government has forfeited its right to rule.
2. Conditions for a “just revolution” include:
– The cause for the revolution must be a just one, not merely a response to burdensome or
inconvenient conditions, or merely an excuse for narrow class or party interests.
– Revolution should be a means of last resort.
– The call for revolutionary action should have reasonable relation to the situation. The leaders of any just revolution should not be engaging in private action, but with the best interest of the society as a whole in view. The “calling” and “gifts,” if valid, will be recognised by the people. A just revolution is therefore different from vigilante action or anarchism.
– There should be reasonable hope of victory. The costs of revolutionary actions are too grave to risk for those who have little hope of succeeding. This implies the importance of wide popular support and moral legitimacy of the cause.
– It must be rightly conducted through rightful means. Some forms of violence are morally impermissible, e.g. torture and mutilation of the opponents. The participants must make every attempt to limit violence and deaths.
= While working for justice in this world, the Christian must never forget that no perfect justice is
attainable now, but only when Christ returns. Political and military actions can only achieve that
much, while the Holy Spirit can renew hearts, lead to changed circumstances, and prepare us for
eternity. Let us not forget to preach the gospel.
Questions
1. Laws are being passed in western countries to ban parents from caning their children. What
Christians do?
2. How should we view the prohibition to spread the gospel to Muslims in this country?
3. Were the British a legitimate authority when they colonised this part of the world? Were the
Japanese a legitimate authority when they conquered this part of the world?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 6: Trade Unionism (Col. 3:18-4:1)
o This is one of the more controverted subject among Christians, although it has not generated as much “heat” as in the subjects of “Divorce and Remarriage”, and “War and Revolution”.
I. The local and international scene.
1. Trade unions came about as a result of the Industrial Revolution in Europe. The purpose was to protect workers from being exploited by employers. They were particularly strong in Britain. They were banned in Britain in the 18th century but became legally recognised in the early 19th century. Strikes have been held which nearly crippled the nation.
2. Malaysia has inherited the British Law, including industrial laws. There are over 300 trade unions in the private and public sectors, and more than half are joint-members of the Malaysian Trade Union Congress. (In 2012 there were 240 members, mostly from the private sector.) Another organisation, CUEPACS, is a federation of trade unions limited to government workers.
3. From the beginning, Christians have been divided over the issue of involvement in trade unions. Many trade unions were started by Christians and the notable leaders have included Christians. Other Christians (including Lord Shaftsbury and William Wilberforce) had felt it not rlght to join. The majority of Christians today feel uneasy about trade unionism.
II. Common ground.
1. Whether for or against, Christians believe that we are accountable to God for our conduct in working life (Col. 3:23; 1 Sam. 2:3).
2. We are directly responsible to our employer and we need to work for him to the best of our ability (Col. 3:23; 2 Thess. 3:10; Eccles 3:13).
3. Sin has affected the working environment so that no amount of effort to improve it can effectively lift the curse of God (Gen. 3:17-19). Sin has affected people, including both workers and employers (Rom. 5:12). Some employers are ruthless and exploiters. Some employees are lazy and always trying to dodge responsibilities.
III. Refutation of the case against.
1. A trade union is a worldly organisation, concerned with worldly (though commendable) matters such as wages, working condition, and the worker’s voice.
Rebuttal: “Secular” is a better word. A secular organisation need not be sinful.
2. The means used are often contrary to God’s word. Union leaders often never conceal their selfishness, covetousness, callousness. Trade unions often disregard the needs of others when they strike or picket.
Rebuttal: But all these are due to sin in the individuals. Christians need to act as salt of the earth and be involved.
3. The commonly used Scriptures would indicate that a Christian should not join trade unions, e.g. 2 Cor 6:14; Luke 3:14; Mark 8:36; 1 Tim. 6:6; Heb. 13:5.
But the contexts must be considered. It is right to remain content, but not right to be exploited if the means are available for redress.
IV. The case for.
1. Should a Christian join the trade union? Yes, because:
– (i) God cares about justice in work, wages and people (Lev. 19:13; Deut. 24:14-15; Mal. 3:5).
– (ii) The law alone cannot protect the dignity of the individual at work. Laws can deal with only clear-cut situations such as the need to pay for labour, but not how much to pay, not what the working conditions should be like, etc.
– (iii) The wage earner is not in a position to negotiate for himself. The employer is also a sinner, and capable of injustice. The power to negotiate means that trade unions should have the ability to put pressure, e.g. by collective withdrawal of labour.
– (iv) Much constructive work can be done, and has been done, through the trade union.
– (v) Most trade unions are democratic, and Christians can speak up. We support an orderly society concerned with solving problems in an orderly way.
2. What do we think of trade unions having too much power?
– (i) This impression is put across by unbalanced reporting, supported by a few individuals with their own agenda. It has been statistically proven that sickness and industrial accidents have caused more loss of working hours than strikes and negotiations by trade unions.
– (ii) Union power is to be distinguished from shop-floor power. Shop-floor power is the abuse of union power by self-interested individuals who call for a strike, for example, for personal gain and not for the welfare of the members.
– (iii) We must not give the impression that Christianity is anti-trade unionism, nor anti- establishment. Our concern is for justice and fair-play for the workers, who are often at a disadvantage when considered individually. We are equally concerned about giving the employer his due for the money and benefits he pays.
3. What are we to think of strikes?
– (i) A strike, in and of itself, is not wrong. Workers have a right to withhold labour collectively when all means of redress over a perceived injustice have gone unheeded. It is a weapon of the last resort. It is a declaration of war, which sometimes is necessary.
– (ii) It is true that some trade unions often strike for frivolous reasons but that would not have happened if Christians were present at all union meetings to speak with love and loyalty.
4. What about the “closed shop”?
– (i) The “closed shop” is the practice where requirement to join a trade union is a condition of employment. Some employers like this because it is easier for them to deal with the union collectively than with a group of workers. Trade unions like this because they do not like their hard work to be enjoyed by non-members.
– (ii) Christian doctors, nurses and lawyers will be out of job if they do not accept this. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with joining a trade union. Most trade unions allow those with religious scruples not to join.
5. What should a Christian unionist aim to do?
– (i) Aim to get involved. Be present at meetings to vote. Aspire to be a union official.
– (ii) Aim to help the union function more smoothly, to be more democratic, to settle disputes, to act fairly and reasonably.
- (iii) Aim for justice, and to be a moderating influence. The strike is always the last resort.
Arbitration is always better than open conflict.
– (iv) Aim for harmony, mutual respect, and friendship. The management need not be looked upon as
enemies of the workers.
Questions
1. The trade union leaders called for a strike and picketed the factory for some frivolous reasons. The majority of the members supported the decision, while the Christian objected. Should the Christian join in the strike and picket? What are the possible consequences?
2. To be consistent, those who claim that it is wrong for a Christian to join a trade union would also have to say it is wrong to take part in politics. Do you agree? Why?
3. One suspects that many Christians do not want to join the trade union, or be active, for reasons other than religious scruples. What possible reasons are there?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 7: Capital Punishment (Gen. 9:1-17)
o Capital punishment is the execution of a criminal under death sentence imposed by competent public
authority. The term “capital” comes from the Latin word “caput,” used by the Romans to refer to the head,
the life, or the civil rights of an individual. The capital of a country is the chief city of that country. Capital
punishment is the extreme penalty.
– The morality of capital punishment has long been debated. Is it consistent with the biblical ethic of love and forgiveness? Isn’t it inherently cruel? Doesn’t it smack of revenge? Wouldn’t its
wrongful administration be irreversible?
I. The teachings of Scripture.
1. The warrant: The pivotal passage is Gen 9:6, “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God He made man.” Is this a divine prediction of the future consequences of murder, or is it a divine command concerning society’s proper punishment of the murderer?
– The natural sense of the passage shows that it is a command. In the immediately preceding verse, God
states that He will require a reckoning for the lifeblood of man, whether it occurs by beast or man. A
rationale for the action is also given, viz. the creation of man in God’s image. A mere description would not
necessitate an explanation.
- The “analogy of Scripture” also shows that it is a command. Later provisions of the Pentateuch (the Five
Books of Moses) require the murderer to be put to death, e.g. Num 35:16-21.
- The rationale given for the death penalty has not been cancelled. The death penalty therefore remains valid
today.
: Rom 13:1-7 affirms capital punishment. In v 4, the “sword” (machaira) is not the ceremonial sword of the
emperor but the sword of the superior magistrates who had the authority to inflict capital punishment.
: In Acts 25:11, Paul clearly presupposed that some crimes are worthy of death.
2. The crime: In the Mosaic law the death penalty was prescribed for eighteen different offences: murder (Ex.
21:12-14); causing the death of a pregnant woman, and possibly the death of her child (Ex 21:22-25); killing a person by a dangerous animal with a history of killing (Ex 21:28-30); kidnapping (Ex 21:16); rape of a married woman (Dt 22:25-29); fornication (Dt 22:13-21); adultery (Lev 20:10); incest (Lev 20:11-12, 14); homosexuality (Lev 20:13); sexual intercourse with an animal (Lev 20:15-16); striking a parent (Ex 21:15); cursing a parent (Ex 21:17); rebelling against parents (Dt 21:18-21); sorcery and witchcraft (Ex 22:18); cursing God (Lev 24:10-16); attempting to lead others to worship other gods (Dt 13:1-16); idolatry (Dt 17:1-6); intentional false testimony that jeopardises someone with the death penalty (Dt 17:12).
- The ceremonial and civil laws connected with the Mosaic covenant have been abrogated (Heb. 8:13). These crimes were punishable by the state because Israel was a theocratic nation.
: The manner by which these crimes were dealt with, viz. by stoning the criminal to death, partook more of the ceremonial laws (Lev. 20:2, 27).
: The offences punishable by death were moral in nature, and therefore are relevant to individual Christians today. In John 7:53-8:11, the Lord abrogated the manner of punishment, without in any way condoning the sin (11).
– Noah stood at the head of a new human race after the flood. The stipulations of the Noahic Covenant apply to all mankind, e.g. permission to eat meat (Gen. 9:3), the promise of no further universal flood (11), the continuation of the seasons (22), and the dread of man by the animals (2). Expressly stated is the death penalty for murder (5-6).
– Today, murder, i.e. malicious and premeditated taking of life, is punishable by death in most countries, although there is mounting pressure to abolish it. Homicide, i.e. unintentional killing, is punishable, but not by death (cf. Ex 21:12-14; Num. 35:22-28). Killing in self-defence is not punishable.
: Many countries include other crimes as punishable by death, e.g. treason, kidnapping, drug
trafficking (in Malaysia), etc.
3. The method: The OT method of execution was by stoning. The Romans executed by crucifixion, decapitation (beheading), burning, and impalement (piercing through with a sharp lance). The Chinese executed by decapitation with the sword. The French decapitated by the guillotine. In England the methods of execution included burning at the stake, drowning, and beheading. Hanging was, and still is, practised in many parts of the world. In recent days, the methods of execution include shooting with guns, the electric chair, and lethal injection.
– Gen 9:6, is in chiastic parallelism (i.e. every word in the first part is repeated in reverse
order in the second part) shows the principle of retribution. The punishment should fit the crime,
no more and no less.
: This is consonant with the basic instincts of mankind.
: It reflects the biblical meaning of justice. The punishment is related to personal responsibility.
: It protects the criminal from being punished more than he deserves. Retribution should be conditioned by two other considerations
: The restoration of the criminal (rehabilitation). Remorse, repentance, restitution may count towards the lightening of the punishment (2 Cor 7:10; Jude 22-23). In the case of murder, pardon by the highest authority may be granted, but it does not minimise culpability (blameworthiness). In other words, the criminal is being spared the death penalty, although he rightly deserves it. It is totally by an act of grace that he is spared the death penalty.
: The deterrent effect is a legitimate consideration, but only a secondary one (1 Tim. 5:20; 1 Pet. 4:17-18). The criminal must be punished primarily because he deserves it, rather than to deter others from the same crime.
II. Objections.
1. Based on John 7:53-8:11, it has been argued that the Lord abolished the death penalty.
– The Greek word translated as “without sin” (anamartetos) in Jn 8:7 does not mean absolute sinlessness. The scribes and Pharisees were not “without fault” because they have failed to produce the adulterous man together with the adulterous woman, as required by Dt 22:22-24. Their aim was to trap the Lord.
– The Lord did not come to abolish the law of Moses, but to fulfil it (Matt 5:17). His death on the cross for sin saves sinners who trust in Him for salvation. It does not cancel the responsibility of sinners for their sin.
– At the most, we can say that the death penalty for adultery has been abrogated, not the death
penalty for murder (Gen. 9:6).
2. Many Christians find it difficult to reconcile the abiding relevance of the capital punishment with the
Lord’s teaching on love and non-violence. The Bible teaches that God is concerned both for the
preservation of the world from evil and for the salvation of the sinner (Matt. 5:13-16; Rom 4:15; 13:3).
The necessity of Christ’s death on the cross is grounded on the fundamental moral fact that certain actions
(sin, crime) are inherently worthy of punishment.
– The problem today is that the punishment often is not in accordance with the principle of retribution.
Criminals are treated more kindly than they deserve, without equal attention paid to the victims of the
crime.
3. Proponents of the abolition of capital punishment often argue that in practice the death penalty is applied
in a discriminatory and arbitrary fashion. But imperfections of administration are not justification for the
abolition of the principle. Rather, it is justification for reforming the administration, to a fairer and just
application.
– It has been argued also that the miscarriage of justice in the case of capital punishment can never be reversed. But its abolition leaves society at danger from the unrepentant criminal, and is unfair to the victim(s).
– It has been argued further that capital punishment shuts out the possibility of a criminal repenting and coming to faith in Christ. But this argument wrongly assumes that each person has a right to determine the exact time when he will repent and be saved. The death penalty reminds the murderer, in a way that life imprisonment cannot, of the truth that “it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgement” (Heb. 9:27).
= The Bible teaches the appropriateness of the death penalty for hardened murderers. It underscores man’s
accountability for his actions, and is a grim reminder of the need to make peace with God while there is
opportunity. Drug trafficking and possession of firearms might be serious crimes but do not constitute
murder.
Questions
1. Should drug traffickers by given the death penalty? Why?
2. The rich and influential are more likely to be spared the death penalty. Do you agree? Why?
3. John Wesley preached earnestly to criminals as they were taken out to be hung. What do you
think of this?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 8: Marriage (Gen 2:18-25)
o With globalisation, western liberal ideas have spread so that marriage has been set aside, with people
“living in.” Single-sex “marriage” is increasingly legalised. Dating has become an accepted practice, and is
confused with courtship. Divorce is common. For all these reasons, marriage is now an ethical issue. (What
actually constitute marriage? Can we not do it some other ways?)
= What are we to think of marriage? How does it affect the those related issues?
I. The biblical teaching on marriage.
1. It is an ordinance of God. God created man “male and female” (Gen. 1:27; 2:18-25). The Lord Jesus Christ declared that men & women united in marriage are united by God (Mt 19:4-6). It follows that:
– Marriage must not be looked upon as a useful custom, but a divine institution.
– Being God’s creatures, men and women have no right to enter into any intimate relationship with each other except for marriage.
– No state has a right to have a law of marriage different from that taught in the word of God.
2. Marriage is a lifetime -union between one man and one woman. Its original institution makes this clear (Gen. 2:18-25). The words of the Lord make this clear (Mt 19:3-10).
– The Bible permits divorce in certain circumstances (see next study). Note, however, that divorce is never commanded, encouraged or approved of. Divorce and separation are contrary to God’s order.
3. Marriage is given for clear reasons.
– Husband and wife complement each other, and find in each other satisfying companionship and mutual help (Gen. 2:18-25).
– Husband and wife have regular, voluntary and satisfying sexual relations (they are “joined together” and become “one flesh”, Eph. 5:31). Otherwise it is not marriage. This is God’s ordinance for the increase of the human race (Gen. 1:28), and the prevention of uncleanness (1 Cor. 7:9).
– In this context they subdue and replenish the earth (Gen. 1:28-29). The family is the basic unit of human society, where authority, love, care and nurture are to be found. The health of family life decides the health of society at large.
4. Marriage is a gift which has certain restrictions.
– Marriage is honourable and lawful in all people who are rational and of age (Heb. 13:4). The Bible does not teach that it is “more holy” to remain single. Singleness is often self-imposed (Matt. 19:12; 1 Cor 7:7). Commanding others to singleness is a doctrine of “deceiving spirits and demons” (1 Tim. 4:1- 3).
– A Christian may marry only a fellow-believer (1 Cor. 7:39; 2 Cor. 6:14). Married unbelievers may become believers (1 Cor. 7:12-13; 1 Pet 3:1), but that is different from a believer choosing to marry an unbeliever.
– Nobody may marry a close relative, i.e. anybody closer than a first cousin, even if that relative is only a relative of your deceased partner (Lev. 18:6-23; 20:10-21). (Affinity: closeness by blood. Consanguinity: closeness by marriage.) The teaching on permanent relationships are moral in nature, and must not be confused with the temporary ceremonies of the Jews (Matt. 19:8-9).
5. Marriage is a gift which has certain rules.
– It requires a public ceremony, where witnesses are present. (This may be a civil marriage, church marriage, or even marriage according to another religion. It is the marriage bond that God honours. Christians would want a church wedding, as an act of worship and witness.)
– Private consent is not sufficient. It is a covenant, made with vows before God and with witnesses present. The Lord approved of marriage, by attending a wedding (Jn 2:1-11), and often referred to it in His own teaching. It is unthinkable that there should be physical union before marriage (Matt. 1:18, 25).
– It sets up a new relationship. It means leaving one’s parents and joining to your partner (Gen. 2:24). This new relationship has priority over all previous relationships.
– Only in marriage may physical union of man and woman take place. This is true even if a couple must wait a long time before being married, as in Jacob’s example (Gen. 29:15-30). The act of physical union makes two people into one (1 Cor. 6:15-20). We are only to be united as one person with a partner to whom we are totally and exclusively committed for life. Any departure from God’s order is prohibited and condemned (Gal. 5:19).
– Clearly defined roles are given in God’s word for each member of the family — loving husbands (Eph. 5:25, 28, 33; Col. 3:19), submissive wives (Eph. 5:22-33; Col 3:18-19), obedient children (Eph. 6:1-3; Col. 3:20; Ex 20:12).
II. The implications of marriage.
1. Christians should choose to have a “Christian” wedding as far as possible. The actual place of the ceremony is not important, but there should be witnesses, vows, and worship (singing of praises to God, preaching from the Bible, and prayer for His blessing).
– A civil marriage alone (involving oaths, witnesses, and the signing of the register), is acceptable and adequate. Social customs may be included to varying degree, provided there are no religious connotations, or worship of idols.
2. Related is the concept of dating, i.e. going out with a different partner each time, for social purposes, should not be encouraged. It is a practice begun in the USA in the 1940s which has spread worldwide. Young people have boyfriends and girlfriends too early, succumb to peer pressure, experience unnecessary emotional problems, and engaging in illicit physical contact and sex.
– It is better to socialise in groups when young, widening the circle of friends, and getting to know some better than others. With time, this will lead to closer friendship with one more than with others. This will be the beginning of courtship. Avoid being together in private places. Continue to be friends to others. Be careful of physical contacts that are in appropriate to the existing level of commitment to one another. Purity in the relationship should be honoured.
3. Those who remain single, by circumstances or choice, must seek to live well for God (Matt. 19:11-12). They can have wholesome lives that are a blessing to the church, and to the many weary, bruised and wounded souls around them. Gospel work, good works, hobbies, and self-improvement pursuits glorify God and benefit self and others. Avoid the following temptations:
– Fornication. i.e. any sexual acts outside of the marriage relationship, which is sinful (Mt 5:32; 19:9; Gal 5:19).
– Premarital sex and masturbation, which are sinful. Like all illicit pleasures, they are addictive. The sexual urge is given to lead us to marriage. It is to be placed under control, and dissipated in wholesome pursuits, before marriage.
– Living together without marriage is an act of rebellion against God. No wonder every single case of such relationship is marked by God’s displeasure, e.g. unhappiness, bad conscience, painful breakups, insecure children, etc.
– Homosexuality and lesbianism, which are abominable to God (Rom 1:27; Rev 21:8; 22:15). Same-sex marriages are not marriages but sinful relationships. Laws that permit same-sex marriages are sinful laws.
= Let us honour the divine institution of marriage. Let us pray for God’s blessing upon it, and work towards
having God-honouring families.
Questions
1. Are we old-fashioned by disapproving of dating? Shouldn’t we adapt to the needs of the time? Is adapting to the needs of the time unbiblical and God-dishonouring?
2. How would you counsel someone who is struggling with living a sexually pure life?
3. May Christians practise match-making today? What about the role of the church in this? What about those who seek the service of match-making agencies,/internet-sites?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 9: Divorce And Remarriage (Mt 19:3-9)
o Divorce is prevalent today. How should Christians view divorce? Is remarriage of divorced people permissible? Are divorced or remarried people allowed to be accepted into church membership, or accepted as church officers?
– In the early church, the view held by Augustine was dominant. Adultery was the only ground for separation, even that did not dissolve the marriage bond.
– The medieval church allowed the wealthy to use the ecclesiastical courts to obtain annulments, but not the less fortunate. An annulment is distinguished from divorce in that it is declared by some authoritative body that the marriage attempted by a couple was invalid according to the rules of society, and that as a consequence a true marriage never existed.
– Martin Luther allowed for full divorce in cases of adultery and wilful desertion. Martin Bucer of Strassburg was willing to extend the grounds for divorce to include cruelty and refusal of conjugal duty.
I. The teaching of the OT.
1. The main passage on divorce is Dt 24:1-4.
– This Mosaic provision was not intended to be a divine endorsement of divorce, but merely a concession to human sinfulness and “hardness of heart” (Mt 19:8). The intention was to regulate and mitigate an existing custom.
– The certificate of divorce mentioned in v. 1 was evidently intended to protect the reputation and rights of the woman, including the right to remarry.
– The meaning of “something uncleanness” has been much debated over. Literally, “nakedness of a thing.”
: It cannot mean adultery, since the death penalty is prescribed for that (Lev 20:10; Dt 22:22).
: This phrase occurs elsewhere only in Dt 23:14, in reference to human excrement. It probably means some
shameful conduct connected with sex life, other than adultery or illicit sexual intercourse. “Indecent or
immodest behaviour” would be a good translation.
2. Malachi 2:10-16 is another crucial passage. It concerns mixed marriages (with unbelievers) and divorce, both of which were serious problems at that time.
– Husbands and wives are to be faithful to one another because: (i) they have one God as their Father; (ii) their relationship rests on a solemn covenant; (iii) God desires godly offspring from the union.
– The prophet reaches back beyond the concessions of Dt 24:1-4 to the creation accounts of Gen 1-2, and anticipates the teachings of the Lord set forth in Mt 5:31-32 and 19:4-9.
II. The teaching of the NT.
1. The “exception clauses” of Mt 5:31-32 and 19:4-9 have been questioned because the accounts in Mk 10:11-12 and Lk 16:18 do not include the phrase “except for sexual immorality.”
– In Jer 3:8, Jehovah is said to divorce Israel for her spiritual adultery (idolatry). If God can properly divorce His bride because of adultery, it is difficult to conclude that the Lord would have allowed for no exceptions whatever.
2. There are Christians who argue that divorce is not permissible under all circumstances, as long as both
partners are alive. The arguments are as follows:
– It is argued that the Lord permits divorce on the ground of “sexual immorality” (or fornication) which is a translation from the Greek word “porneia.” This word is different from “adultery” (Greek “moicheia”) used later in the verse. The argument is that fornication means improper sexual relations while unmarried, while adultery means improper sexual relations when married (cf Acts 15:20, 29; 1 Cor 6:13, 18; Col 3:5).
– Fornication may occur during the betrothal period of a Jewish couple. This betrothal was much more binding than our “engagement” and the couple were considered husband and wife although they were strictly forbidden to have physical union (Mt 1:18-19; Dt 24:1-4). This exceptional clause therefore does not apply to our days.
– 1 Cor 7:15 teaches that the unbelieving partner may leave/depart, but the believer is not to consider the marriage bond dissolved. The believer must remain unmarried for there is the possibility of reconciliation (1 Cor 7:11), and the unbelieving partner may in time believe (1 Cor 7:16).
3. Another view is that divorce is permissible, although not commanded (the so-called Westminster View).
– The word fornication is used in the broadest sense covering all forms of improper sexual
relations, including adultery. It may include incest (1 Cor 5:1), intercourse with prostitutes (1 Cor 6:13 cf vv 15-16), premarital sex (cf Mt 1:18-19), homosexual practices (Lev 18:22; Rom 1:26-28; 1 Cor 6:9), and bestiality (Lev 18:23).
: The exceptional clause in Mt 19:9 is something new and different from what is referred to in Mt 19:7-8. The exceptional clause of v. 9 is the NT equivalent of the stoning to death for adultery in Dt 22:22, while Mt 19:7-8 is a reference to Dt 24:1-4, in which the “some uncleanness or indecency” is something other than adultery.
– When one partner commits adultery, he has gone against the very essence of marriage (one- man-one-wife, committal to each other, an ordinance of God, etc.). Moreover, he is now one flesh with another woman (1 Cor 6:16).
: In the OT, the person who committed adultery was stoned to death, and the other party could remarry (cf Rom 7:2-3). The Lord abolished the death penalty for adultery in John 7. But adultery is still the detestable sin that it is. If the OT is kind to the partner who can remarry, the NT is also kind to the partner who can remarry.
– In 1 Cor 7:10-11, separation (e.g. due to persistent physical abuse) is permitted with the view of reconciliation. If reconciliation is not possible, after prolonged separation (civil law stipulates 2 years), divorce is permitted. The guilty party has shown himself to be an unbeliever. Remarriage is then possible.
: There are those who argue against remarriage. But comparison with Mt 19:6, and the fact that Paul must have been aware that in the Gentile world the wife had the legal right to initiate a divorce proceeding, shows that ultimate divorce is view.
: In 1 Cor 7:12-16, mixed marriages is in view. The believing partner may agree to the unbelieving partner’s insistence for divorce. Remarriage is allowed (“not under bondage” in v 15 cf Rom 7:2-3).
Conclusions
1. God hates divorce (Mal 2:16). But not all divorces are sinful. Divorce is permissible (though not obligatory) only in the case of adultery and desertion by an unbelieving spouse. The wounded party may remarry after divorce.
2. An adulterer or adulteress may not be accepted into church membership unless there is true repentance.
What constitute true repentance? Sorrow over the sin, breaking away from that sin, making attempts to
prevent falling into it again, voluntarily making restitution where necessary and possible, allowing for a
period to prove change.
3. 1 Tim 3:2 prohibits the ordination of a practising polygamist. The expression actually means “a one-
woman man,” which emphasises the faithfulness and stability of present marriage.
– There are those who insist that a fallen man may not hold office for the rest of his life. But no convincing biblical arguments have been given.
– True repentance means a fresh start in the eyes of God, freedom from guilt of past sins, and new possibilities for the future (cf 1 Cor 6:9-11). Those who have sinned in the past should be allowed to assume leadership positions, but prudence will require that the man has proved himself over a period of time (cf 1 Cor 10:23).
Questions
1. A man goes “missing in action” e.g. during a war, or while out fishing at sea. The wife waits for her return
for the required seven years (according to civil law) and then marries another man. What if the first
husband returns? How should we regard the situation, and counsel the people concerned?
2. Can a divorced and remarried man be a pastor, elder or deacon in any church?
3. Some churches hold to the no-remarriage view. What should a remarried Christian do in such a church?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 10: Homosexuality (Rom. 1:18-31)
Recent years saw homosexuality becoming more “visible.” Gay rights are increasingly recognised legally. Some churches have ordained self-confessed homosexuals as ministers. The spread of AIDS (& hepatitis B, syphilis, rectal gonorrhea, etc) has been linked to homosexuality.
– What are Christians to think of homosexuality?
I. Some common misunderstandings.
1. Definitions:
-A homosexual act is one aimed at producing sexual orgasm (excitement) between members of the same sex.
-A homosexual is a man or woman who engages in homosexual acts. (Female homosexuals have been called lesbians.)
– A person who is actually heterosexual (i.e. who has natural desires for the opposite sex) and has picked up homosexual behaviour has been called a pervert. A person who has never experienced any desire for the opposite sex but is a homosexual has been called an invert.
2. A person is not born a homosexual. Homosexual behaviour is not caused by differences in the genes. Attempts to discover the cause of such behaviour in the genetic makeup has failed.
– With rare exceptions, our bodies are completely male or female, although hormonal imbalances make each person differ from another in maleness or femaleness. For example, a woman may have a moustache and yet be completely feminine.
– The different degrees of maleness or femaleness in a person does not cause him/her to become homosexual. Homosexual behaviour is a habit that is picked up.
3. Homosexuals are disliked, despised and shunned by most people. Homosexuals are mostly
unhappy people because they face discrimination, have a bad conscience, and never gain understanding or acceptance from the general public.
– Loneliness and rejection are more acute in them. Like everyone, they long to be known, loved, and accepted. Many are afraid to come out and join the gay world (i.e. the society of homosexuals.)
II. The causes of homosexuality.
1. A dominant mother and a passive father may produce the environment that affects the healthy growth of masculinity in the son, and of femininity in the daughter. The son may seek in others the qualities the father lacks. It may cause a docile daughter to look to a female figure for protection. They may become more vulnerable to homosexual temptations.
2. A family that yearns for a daughter may dress up a son as a girl. Feminine pet-names may be given to him, and feminine behaviour may be subtly encouraged. As the boy grows up, he gravitates to female companions, not because of attraction to them, but identification with them. Again, the boy in such a situation becomes vulnerable to homosexual temptations.
3. The environment, however, is not a necessary or sufficient condition for the onset of homosexual behaviour. From a biblical perspective, a combination of nature and nurture give rise to homosexual behaviour.
– Man brings a fallen nature into a social environment that itself bears the marks of sin. Homosexuality is one of the distortions that can result from that interaction.
– A person may be seduced by an older man or by someone his own age, often when in enforced confinement with other men, e.g. in the armed forces, in jail, or in boarding schools. Once he experiences the pleasure of sex play with someone of his own sex, it becomes appealing the next time. If the pleasure and the sexual relief are such as to outweigh his sense of guilt and shame, he becomes addicted.
III. The Bible’s teaching.
1. God created man male and female, in His own image and likeness (Gen 1:27). Human sexuality is reflected in maleness and femaleness, not in any combination of the two. Sexual differentiation is the basis of human marriage, procreation, and family life, which is the fundamental form of human community.
– As a result of the Fall, the marriage relationship is marked by lust, violence, and the struggle
for dominance and power (Gen 3:16-19). Homosexuality is one expression among many of the
basic disordering of human life. All lust, whether heterosexual or homosexual, violates the divine law and reflects man’s fallen nature.
2. The first reference to homosexuality in the Bible is found in Gen 19:1-11. Homosexual intentions were at least partly responsible for the divine judgement on Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 18:20-22; Jude 7).
– Explicit references to homosexuality is also found in Judges 19 (vv. 22-25), in which divine judgement came in the form of military action (Judg. 20).
– Homosexual practices are strongly condemned in the Mosaic law (Lev 18:22). Such offences carried the death penalty (Lev 20:13).
– Homosexuality is condemned strongly in the NT (Rom 1:25-27; 1 Cor 6:9; 1 Tim 1:9-10).
3. Some have argued that all these scriptures refer to perversions, i.e. heterosexuals turning to homosexual behaviour. It is claimed that the NT does not condemn the man or woman whose sexual orientation (the “invert”) drives him/her into an intimate lasting relationship with a member of the same sex.
– This cannot be true because the sexual relationship was created for male and female, not male and male, or female and female. The theological context of Rom 1, 1 Cor 6, and 1 Tim 1 is, ultimately, creation.
IV. Practical issues.
1. The church cannot compromise the fundamental biblical teaching: homosexuality is contrary to God’s will for human sexuality.
– At the same time, each church must consider its attitude to struggling homosexuals. The sin of homosexuality must be rejected, but effort must be made to reclaim the sinner.
– The church needs to sound forth clearly the message of the power of divine grace to transform sinful attitudes. God’s grace saves, God’s grace also transforms (1 Cor 6:9-11).
– No practising homosexuals may be appointed to positions of leadership in the church. If the unrepentant practice of sexual sin bars one from the kingdom of God, surely it bars one from leadership in the church (1 Cor 6:9; James 3:1; 1 Tim 4:12).
2. Should the church support the drive to ensure “civil rights” for homosexuals? Homosexual behaviour, unlike one’s race or gender, is not a truly involuntary condition. The drive for “civil rights” is in fact a drive for society’s approval on a form of behaviour that historically has been considered deviant.
– The denial of legal sanction and society’s approval of homosexual behaviour does not imply that Christians should condone or encourage the deliberate entrapment, harassment, or persecution of practising homosexuals.
3. What should homosexuals do?
– It is not wrong to seek medical help. Drugs can bring relief to compulsive urges, but does not
really cure, and can have side-effects. Also, note that some techniques used, e.g. hypnotic
suggestions, are of questionable from the moral point of view.
– Seek the help of a mature Christian friend. Talk to him frankly, and pray with him. Cultivate godliness through discipline. Live a Spirit-filled life, attend to the means of grace, obey God.
– Consider marriage as an option. It is not a cure, and problems may be encountered. The partner must be made aware of your problems from early on in the relationship. Wise counsel from others may be needed.
– What if marriage and normal sexual relations will never be yours? Your life can still be one of great fulfillment (Heb 2:17-18; 4:15; 2 Cor 1:3-4; 2 Cor 1:5). The sufferings of Christ may be yours: in this case, to live a chaste and useful life.
Questions
1. How would you react if someone in church comes to you for help over his homosexuality?
2. What would you say to a Christian who attends a church that ordains homosexuals?
3. What should the church do w.r.t the pressure to legalise same-sex marriage?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 11. Transvestism And Sex-change (1 Cor 11:1-16)
o This subject is related to, but different from, homosexuality. Some aspects of what was discussed in homosexuality will be relevant here.
– Like homosexuality, transvestism is a historical phenomenon, known in every culture, and alluded to in the Bible. Sex-change, by surgery and hormone therapy, is something recent.
I. Definitions and perceptions.
1. Definitions:
– “Transvestism” comes from “trans” and “vestire,” which in Latin mean “across” and “to dress.”
– A transvestite is a person who derives pleasure from dressing like the opposite sex.
- A transsexual is a person who has undergone sex-change by surgery.
– In a politically-correct climate, a transvestite is referred to as a “transgendered person.” They are further sub-divided into “pre-operative transgenderist” and “post-operative transgenderist.”
2. Related to this subject is the modern phenomenon of Cosplay (Costume + Play) in which person dresses up as a character from the comics, video games, film shows, or books.
– In the past masquerades (wearing masks & costumes) were for special events such a Halloween, parties or dances. Today, there are those who wear the costumes on a fairly regular basis, and attempt to take on the characteristics of the character.
– Cosplay started off in Japan in 1984, spread to other countries very quickly. The popularity of this subculture was checked when there were some cases of gruesome murders and other crimes committed by the players.
– Fun is one think, childishness & fantasising is another. The Bible condemns hypocrisy and dissimulation (Prov. 24:24-26; Matt. 6:2; Luke 18:9-14; Rom. 12:9; 1 Pet. 2:1).
3. Not all transvestites are homosexuals. Many of them are heterosexual men, i.e. they are sexually attracted to females and may be married, with children, but derives pleasure from dressing (at least occasionally) as women.
– Other transvestites have a condition called “gender dysphoria” in which they feel intense pain, anguish, and anxiety because they are born as male or female, but sense themselves as being of the opposite sex.
– While gender identity and sexual orientation must not be confused, they are closely linked. A person who psychologically thinks himself female is likely to be attracted to a male. There are many cases of transvestites who are homosexuals.
– As with homosexuality, attempts to prove that transgenderism is rooted in the genes have failed.
II. The biblical teaching.
1. God created man male and female (Gen. 1 & 2). It is His intention that human sexuality should be expressed between two persons of opposite sex. That is the basis of the family, through which there is procreation, and by which the world is to be populated and subdued (Gen 2:18, 23-24; 1:28).
– The Fall caused human nature to become sinful, and plunged the universe into sin (Rom 5:12; 8:19-22). Death, decay and imperfection affected the human race and all creation. Each individual is capable of behaviour that is perverse and sinful.
2. The costume of men and women in the OT times was very similar, but there was an easily recognisable distinction between male and female attire of the Israelites. The women’s tunic was longer (reaching to the feet, while that of men reached to the ankle), and made of finer material. The women also wore a veil over the head, while the men wore a cap or turban, if at all.
- The Mosaic law clearly forbade the men to wear women’s clothes, and vice versa (Deut. 22:5).
– The NT emphasises that the distinction between male and female must not be blurred or erased (1 Cor. 11:1-16). Man and woman are created with biological, emotional, and psychological differences (Gen. 2:23-24; 1 Cor. 11:9; 1 Tim. 2:13-14). They perform different roles in the home and in the church (1 Tim. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 14:34-35). This is not a case of superiority or inferiority, but one of complementary roles (Gen. 2:18; 1 Cor. 11:11-12).
– Another relevant principle is that of contentment. Not only are we to be content with what God has given us materially (1 Tim. 6:6-8), but also with our circumstances (1 Cor. 7:24) and our endowments (Matt. 25:29; 1 Cor 12:11). If we are born male, let us be male; if female, let us be female.
– Transvestism is therefore wrong in the sight of God. It is sinful to for a man to desire to be a woman, and to dress like one, and vice versa. It is sinful to undergo sex-change.
III. The challenges to Christians.
1. What are the causes of transvestism? We know it is not in the genes, at least up to the present. If ever homosexuality and transvestism can be linked to the genes (which is unlikely), thus explaining the tendency/orientation, it still does not excuse the behaviour. Fallen man is inclined to sin in various ways, and none of those sins are excusable.
– As with homosexuality, three aspects of the individual must be considered: physically/biologically, physiologically, and psychologically.
: A person is either male or female from the physical/biological point of view. This is determined by our genes.
: Physiology is the science dealing with the functions and vital processes of living organisms. From the physiological point of view, a person may have more or less male hormones and, therefore, more maleness or femaleness. A man may be more masculine than others, and a
woman may be more feminine than others. (Men who have taken in too much growth hormone because of eating chicken necks have shown female characteristics. Women with too much male hormone have grown beards.) Physiology, in and of itself, does not cause transvestism.
: A person can be psychologically conditioned to think himself male or female. Improper upbringing, e.g. a boy being dressed as a girl, may be the cause. Reinforced by habits, and influence from others, sinful behaviour may be picked up.
– Whatever the physiological or psychological pre-disposition, dressing and living like the opposite sex is sinful behaviour. It is something that must be repented of. Medical help may be necessary. Repentance and faith in Christ is the ultimate answer.
2. Maleness must not be confused with machoism, i.e. behaving egoistically, showing off,
coarseness in behaviour, etc. Similarly, femaleness must not be confused with effeminacy, i.e.
showing weakness, delicacy, helplessness, emotional fragility, etc.
– On the practical level: (i) Do not tease males who have more delicate features and behaviour, and females who have coarser features and behaviour; (ii) Do not attempt to blur the distinction between maleness and femaleness by your hairstyle, dress, or behaviour.
– The Bible encourages a gentle, considerate, and peaceable spirit. As we grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour, we should show forth more and more the fruit of the Spirit (2 Pet 3:18; Gal 5:22-23).
Questions
1. Drag (Dressed Resembling A Girl) Shows in which transvestites entertain others with dance,
songs, and jokes are found in some parts of the world. How should we think of such shows?
2. A person who has transvestite tendencies seeks help from you. How would you help him?
3. How prevalent is the attempt to blur the distinction between maleness and femaleness in today’s
culture? Do you think this is related to the human rights and the feminist movements?
_________________________________________________________________
Study 12. Abortion (Ps 139:1-16)
o Abortion is the termination of the life of an unborn child. It is illegal in most countries although more and more countries are making it legal, at least for some circumstances such as pregnancy caused by rape.
– Is the unborn baby an individual human? Is abortion murder? How do we help those with unexpected pregnancy?
I. History and practice.
1. Abortion is not a modern practice. It was practised in most pagan cultures. It is referred to in Middle Assyrian literature (the Code of Hammurabi, the laws of Tiglath-Pileser I). Both Plato and Aristotle approved of it. By the time of the Roman Empire, it was widely accepted. It was successfully confronted head-on by the expanding Christian church such that the sanctity of unborn life became universally accepted, although abortion continued to take place here and there.
2. In modern times, abortion has been championed in Russia, Japan, then Eastern Europe. Finally the West have followed suit, allowing, and even promoting, the practice. In Malaysia, abortion is illegal although amendment has been made to allow for it if the medical practitioner, “in good faith”, is of the opinion that it will preserve: (i) the life of the woman; (ii) her physical or mental health.
- The statistics vary from country to country, but they all show increasingly high rates. For example, the number of abortions in USA every four months is greater than the number of Americans who died in the Second World War, i.e. over 400,000. The womb has become more deadly than the battlefield.
3. In the past, ingesting herbal medicine, often combined with bizarre substances such as washing powder. lime juice, or gin (distilled alcohol made from berries) combined with physical extraction of the unborn baby, were used with many cases of infection, genital trauma, and fatalities. Modern clinical methods include:
– The dilation and curettage technique, for early pregnancies. The cervix is dilated, a tube is inserted into the mother’s uterus. A suction apparatus tears the little baby apart and deposits him in a jar. A curette is then used to scrape the wall of the uterus to remove any remaining parts of the baby. Often, suction is not used at all. The baby is simply cut to pieces by the curette when the placenta is scraped out.
– Saline abortion or salt poisoning, after the third month of pregnancy. A solution of concentrated salt is injected into the amniotic fluid. The salt is absorbed by the baby, which poisons him to death in about an hour. About a day later the mother goes into labour to deliver forth a dead, shrivelled baby. Other chemicals have been used. Sometimes, the babies are born alive, but they seldom live long.
– Hysterotomy, for more developed pregnancies. This is like a Caesarean operation, except that the baby is killed or left to die.
II. How we should view abortion.
1. Scientifically speaking, is the unborn child a human being? All 46 chromosomes are present at conception. His heart is beating at 20 days. At 40 days brain waves can be detected. At 8 weeks all his organs, and fingerprints, have already formed. At 12 or 13 weeks he recoils from pain and sucks his thumb.
– There is continuity in life before, and after, birth. It is arbitrary to say life begins at animation, viability or birth. Yet the unborn child has been labelled a “protoplastic mass” or “foetal tissue,” and abortion itself has been called “a method of post-conceptive fertility control” or “termination of pregnancy.”
2. Biblically considered:
– Job 31:15; Ps 139:13-16; Is 44:2, 24; Jer 1:5. Every child in the womb is fearfully and wonderfully made. When David refers to his origin in the womb, he uses the first-person personal pronoun (Ps 139:13).
– Ps 51:5; 58:3. Sin is traced back, not to the newborn baby. but to thee unborn infant.
– The unborn are always treated as human, who can move, and even leap (Gen 25:22; Lk 1:41, 44), may be consecrated to God’s service (Jer 1:5; Gal 1:15); filled with the Holy Spirit (Lk 1:15), and blessed (Lk 1:42).
– The same Greek word “brephos” is used to describe the unborn John the Baptist (Lk 1:41), the newborn baby Jesus (Lk 2:12, 16), the young children who were brought to the Lord (Lk 18:15), and the children killed at Pharoah’s command (Acts 7:19).
– The word used for describing the killing of a child in the womb (Jer. 20:17) is the same as that used to describe David’s slaying of Goliath (1 Sam 17:50-51).
3. Ex 21:22-25 has been interpreted in two ways.
– The NASV, RSV, NEB and GNB say “miscarriage” in v 22. The AV says “her fruit depart from her.” The NKJ and NIV says “she gives birth prematurely.” Here, the death of either mother or child is punishable according as the husband will lay upon him. This understanding is to be favoured. The Hebrew word for “miscarriage” is not used here, although it can be found elsewhere in the OT (Gen 31:38; Ex 23:26; Hos 9:14). Instead, Ex 21:22 uses a word which simply means “to depart” or “to go out.” Moreover, Scripture consistently refer to the unborn child as a human being.
– Throughout Scripture, God’s judgement always falls on those who slay the unborn (2 K 8:11- 12; 2K 15:16; Amos 1:13).
4. The conclusion: The unborn baby is a human being, bearing God’s image, and is protected under the Sixth Commandment (Ex 20:13). Abortion is murder!
III. Our response.
1. What about the extreme cases where an unborn child seriously threatens the physical life of the mother?
– Occasionally, and ectopic pregnancy occurs, i.e. the child is not growing in the uterus but in the fallopian tube. A developed pregnancy can have one result – death for both mother and child. Here, an abortion is necessary, in the present state of technology.
– In the present state of technology, those with certain congenital heart defect, such as hole-in-the heart, are strongly advised not to get pregnant, and to consider adoption instead. When pregnancy occurs, abortion is normally carried out because the risk to the life of the mother is too high. The increase of blood volume during pregnancy will cause excessive stress on the heart of the mother, leading to fatality.
– Apart from such clear-cut cases, abortion should not be immediately thought of as right simply because there is a risk to the mother. Whether the life of the mother or the life of the child is of greater value is not a matter for human decision. The fallibility of human doctors, even on medical matters, is a further cause for hesitation.
2. In the case of rape, a number of points must be noted.
– Firstly, a resultant pregnancy is extremely rare.
– Secondly, and more importantly, if abortion is wrong because it destroys human life, it must be rejected even in the difficult case of rape. “Two wrongs do not make a right.”
3. Abortion must also be rejected in the case of a child likely to be born severely handicapped. The providence of God is such that non-viable babies die of themselves, e.g. Anencephaly (without brain and skull).
– It is not for anyone to judge the worth of a human being. Life which labours under some handicap is not worthless. Beethoven was deaf, Michelangelo was epileptic, Helen Keller was both blind and deaf, Fanny Crosby was blind, George Whitefield had a squint. Then, we have to consider the joy and blessing that come to people have had to look after handicapped children.
– Biblically, care for the handicapped is seen as part of a believer’s reverence for God (Lev 19:14). It is God who made all men, whether handicapped or not (Ex 4:11; Prov 17:5; 2 Cor 12:9). God’s grace is sufficient for the family to take care of the handicapped child.
– If abortion is legalised for such cases, men will embark on a “search and destroy” mission. Christ’s ethic was not “search and destroy,” but “to seek and to save” (Mt 12:20: Isa 42:3).
4. The evil of abortion is rampant today.
– Parents go for abortion because their contraceptive measures failed and they do not want more children.
- Young people engage in premarital sex and quietly go for abortion.
– Unscrupulous doctors (including professing Christians) try to earn more by giving abortion on demand and by frightening patients into the need for abortion.
– The general idea is prevalent that the unborn child is somehow less human.
– Selfish and sinful parents claim that they have the right to keep or destroy the unborn to preserve their “happiness.”
= Who among us today will stand up and “speak up for the dumb”?
= To those who have been guilty of abortion: for the sin of blood, there is the atonement in blood of
Christ. If you repent, “the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanses us from all sin” (1 Jn 1:7).
Questions
1. What would you suggest for: (a) victims of rape; (b) those pregnant through premarital sex?
2. What would you suggest to Christian doctors and nurses who might be ordered to perform abortions?
3. What can we do as a church to “speak up for the dumb”?
_________________________________________________________________
Study13, Infanticide And Euthanasia (1 Cor 15:50-58)
We begin with some definitions. Abortion is the killing of the unborn child. Infanticide is the
deliberate killing of the newborn child. Euthanasia is the deliberate killing of people prematurely. (Originally, the word in Greek eu+thanatos meant a good, happy death, which every wanted.)
- Familiarity with the issues raised is necessary to make a definite & convincing biblical stand.
I. The issues.
1. Historically, the disposal of unwanted children has been a widespread practice in pagan cultures.
– In ancient Greece, China, and many parts of the world, weak and deformed infants have been left to die. In Sparta, it was required by law.
– Plato advocated that infants with deformed limbs should ideally be buried in some obscure place. Aristotle advocated that “nothing imperfect or maimed” should be brought up, and that a limit be put to the number of children a couple could have, beyond which pregnancies should be ended by abortion.
– In ancient Rome, the law forbade the rearing of deformed children.
– The Australian Aborigines at one time practised infanticide, with the women who killed their own children occasionally eating them.
-In pre-industrial Japan infanticide was so common that it was referred to as ”mabiki,” i.e. thinning, as in rice seedlings.
– After the legalisation of abortion in America in 1973, there is increasing pressure for the legalisation of infanticide and euthanasia.
2. Medically and psychologically, various problems are encountered.
– Parents who expect a normal baby, and assume that it is their right to have one, will be shattered when the baby turns out to be deformed.
– Some physicians are of the view that they should not treat “hopeless cases”. They have a right to withhold treatment, and in some instances, to end or hasten death. The improvement of medical science has changed the situation for previously “hopeless” cases, e.g. spina bifida (“divided spine” and Down’s syndrome (“Mongolism”).
: Neonatology, which deals with babies in the first month after birth, has made it possible for premature infants as small as 800gm. to survive with a high rate of zero-handicap. (Latest, 244gm, or 8.6 oz., 23 weeks gestation, 2018 USA.)
: Prenatal surgery has enabled unborn babies to have defects corrected, e.g. implanted shunts in the skull of those with hydrocephalic conditions, bladder operations, etc.
– Philosophers and ethicists reject the Judeo-Christian ethic of the “sanctity of life” in favour of a humanistic ethic of the “quality of life.” They argue that parents should be spared the psychological anguish, and burden, of raising the handicapped children. It is further argued that the handicapped infant is incapable of envisaging a future for itself and therefore does not possess a serious right to life. The “quality of life” is determined by others, not the infant.
: The “cost-benefit” considerations have also been raised. The claim is that society has to spend a disproportionate amount of money to treat and care for the handicapped. It is forgotten (or conveniently overlooked) that the cost of providing institutional care for 5000 Down’s syndrome children in a typical year amounts to only about one tenth of what Americans spend on dog food.
3. Since 1983, some states in America have allowed for “living wills” to be made, in which are stipulate that extraordinary means NOT be used to keep the people concerned alive should hope of recovery be gone and they find themselves physically incompetent to make their wishes known.
– In Asian countries, including Malaysia, euthanasia is taboo because of religious, cultural and traditional beliefs. The beliefs in a Creator and the sanctity of life prevents living wills from being pursued.
: Strangely, the same religious and cultural beliefs have not prevented infanticide (the killing of newborn babies). Government policies (“mabiki” in Japan, one-child policy in China) had, until recent days, encouraged infanticide. With the availability of ultrasound and clinical abortion, there is an increase in the killing of the unborn instead.
II. The biblical perspective.
1. Human life is unique and special. We are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:27). Much as we value all God’s creation, and much as we love our pet animals, the sanctity of human life must be upheld (Gen. 9:6).
2. Human life begins at conception (Ps. 51:5; 139:13-16). Christ took on human nature beginning with conception, although His was by the Holy Spirit (Mt 1:20). Life must therefore be protected from conception.
3. Human life requires stewardship. Life is a “gracious gift” from God (1 Pet. 3:7). A gift so great deserves gratitude from the given to the Giver (Ps. 139:14; Col. 2:7). It is exceedingly precious and must be guarded and nurtured (Dt. 30:19). We are answerable to God for the stewardship of our life (Rom. 14:12). We are to take a caring concern for others in our family (1 Tim. 5:8). We are to have a protective interest in the lives of our neighbours, and the wider human family (Lk. 10:30-37).
4. Human life ends in natural death. God is the Creator (Gen. 1:27), the Sustainer (Ps. 54:4), the Giver of human life (1 Tim. 6:13). He is also the Taker of human life (1 Sam. 2:6; Ps. 104:29; Job 1:21). To choose, or engineer, or bring about death — whether our own or someone else’s — without divine sanction, is to usurp God’s prerogative.
5. Innocent life is not to be taken. The killing of animals was acceptable (Gen. 9:3) but the first murder brought down God’s wrath (Gen. 4:9-10). Murder is expressly forbidden by God (Gen. 9:6; Ex. 20:13). Capital punishment and just wars have the sanction of Scripture, but not the deliberate taking of innocent lives (Isa. 59:7; Rom. 3:15; Mt. 27:4).
6. All human life needs to be protected and cared for. The widow and the fatherless, the disabled, the unborn, the newborn, and the elderly are included (James 1:27). Such people should be able to look to Christians, above all others, for love, protection and support (Zech. 7:8-10).
7. We have talked about life. What of death? - Death is an intrusion into God’s good universe. It is a direct consequence of man’s sin. - At the same time, death is inevitable, since it is “the wages of sin” (Rom. 6:23). There is a time to be born, and a time to die (Eccl. 3:2). barring the immediate return of Christ, each individual must experience death. - To the Christian, it is “the last enemy” which will be overcome at Christ coming and the final resurrection (1 Cor. 15:26, 56). For the unbeliever, death is the prelude to final judgement and eternal damnation (Heb. 9:27; Rev. 21:8).
III. Practical conclusions.
1. The proper practice of medicine should be guided by a life-affirming ethics. A physician should seek to cure, to heal, and to prolong life.
– Modern technology makes the determination of the point of death difficult, but not impossible. The heart may be kept functioning, the lungs breathing, and the kidney running, although the patient is unconscious. However, when total brain damage occurs, i.e. cessation of functions of the cerebrum, cortex, and brain stem, death may safely be accepted.
2. However, there is no moral obligation to provide useless treatment to a genuinely terminal patient. The patient will die whether or not the treatment is provided. The doctor’s duty is to provide care and comfort to the patient. Prolonging life is different from hindering death, healing the sick is different from preserving the dying.
– To the patient, there may be the struggle of whether extraordinary measures should be taken to preserve life and attempt a cure. The stage of the illness, the ability to bear the cost, the likelihood of a cure, will have to be weighed up in consultation with family members and doctors. The Christian has a recourse not available to the non-Christian, viz. prayer to the true and living God, whose will we will accept.
3. Legalisation of infanticide and euthanasia should be resisted. Not only is it against biblical ethics, it will practically destroy trust in the doctor-patient relationship. Is the doctor here to quicken my death or to heal me? With the development of organ transplant technology, patients who have willed to donate may be asking, “Is he here to heal me or to harvest spare parts from me?”
= Not all issues related to infanticide and euthanasia are easily resolved. The believer has the promises and guidance of Scripture, the help of the Holy Spirit in prayer, and the fellowship of the saints to help in difficulties and trials.
Questions
1. Christian doctors have to be better grounded in biblical teaching than other professionals. Do you agree? Why?
2. How would you counsel someone who has a terminally ill patient in the family? How would you counsel the patient himself?
3. Should doctors be sued for: (a) withholding treatment that results in death; (b) apparently causing death?
_________________________________________________________________
2019/2-14, Suicide (Rom. 8:31-39)
Here, we limit ourselves to suicide as is normally encountered, excluding “assisted suicide” in euthanasia. The word suicide comes from the Latin sui (“of oneself”) and caedere (“to kill”). It is the taking of one’s own life voluntarily and intentionally.
Our aim is to understand the seriousness of issue and provide a biblical perspective so that we are better equipped to help those with suicidal tendencies.
I. How widespread is suicide?
1. Malaysian Law, under the Penal Code, Section 309, makes attempted suicide an offence punishable with imprisonment up to one year or with a fine, or with both. Malaysia’s Penal Code follows the old common law approach to attempted suicide, inherited from British law. Criminals were known to have committed suicide to avoid the penalty of law for their crime. Making suicide an offence was seen as a way to deter criminals from taking the easy way out because if they failed, they would face punishment for their crime as well as for the attempted suicide.
2. In many countries, including India, all the countries in Europe, North America, South America, Australia, New Zealand, and Hong Kong that law has been repealed and attempted suicide is now considered a health problem requiring psychological /psychiatric treatment. Like Malaysia, many African and Asian countries which are former colonies of Britain or France continue to uphold the criminality of attempted suicide — including Brunei, Singapore, and Bangladesh. Complicity in suicide, however, is regarded as a crime, i.e. when a person aided, abetted, counselled or procured the suicide of another person.1
3. The WHO reports that suicide is a global phenomenon, with 79% of suicides occurring in low- and middle-income countries in 2016. Suicide accounted for 1.4% of all deaths worldwide, making it the 18th leading cause of death in 2016.2 In Malaysia, police statistics show that there are more than 500 cases of people committing suicide or attempted suicide every year in the past four years — making over 2,000 suicide cases over the past four years.3
II. What are the causes of suicide?
1. Research has shown that society at large holds a negative attitude to attempted suicide, stereotyping it as attention-seeking, selfish, incompetent, emotionally weak, and immoral.4 Suicidal behaviour is seldom reported for fear of marring the family’s social image and for fear of prosecution from the police. In Malaysia, those who have suicidal tendency are encouraged to seek help from the Befrienders, a non-profit organisation that provides emotional support to those who are in distress, or the Malaysian Mental Health Association. From the statistics provided by the Befrienders, there is a steady rise of young people who emailed or phoned in for help. Relationship issues were cited as one of the main reasons for their problems (62.4%), followed by studies or financial problem (19.3%) and mental health (18.3%).2
2. From the perspective of the church, common causes of suicides and suicidal tendencies include:
(i)Prolonged tension in marriage resulting from unfaithfulness of a spouse, often on the part of the husband, causing the wife to be suicidal;
(ii) Sexual deprivation, often by the wife, causing the husband to be frustrated, humiliated — leading either to violence or suicidal depression;
(iii) Postnatal depression in the wife, requiring medical attention, while the husband is ignorant of the situation. The WHO reports that worldwide about 10% of pregnant women and 13% of women who have just given birth experience a mental disorder, primarily depression. In developing countries, the figures are higher, almost doubled.5 Not all cases of depression lead to suicide, but some do.
3. Although suicide among believers are relatively rare, the seriousness of the issue must not be ignored or overlooked. Church leaders should be well-informed on this, and church members should be taught so as to protect themselves from being tempted in this matter, and also to be equipped to help the weaker ones.
– We take cognisance also that depression is a sickness due to genetics and hormonal problems, which is beyond the control of the persons concerned.
– We also note that stress related to studies, work, and relationships can affect those prone to depression.
III. What does Scripture teach about suicide?
1. We have seen that God is the giver of life and He alone has the right to take it (Gen. 1:26-27; Job 1:21; 12:10). Human life is sacred and the one who takes a life is punishable with death (Gen. 9:6). Civil authorities have been granted the power to impose the death penalty upon murderers (Rom. 13:4). The sanctity of life also lies behind laws that criminalise suicide.
2. God determines when we will be called home (Ps. 31:15). The Lord alone holds “the keys of Death and Hades” (Rev. 1:18). While alive, we are to “grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18) — seeking to be useful and fruitful. When old and infirmed, we can still pray and set a good example of faith to the end.
3. In the Bible, the few examples of people who killed themselves or were killed at their own request were actually under God’s judgement.
– (i) Abimelech, a son of Gideon, who was severely wounded by a millstone thrown down by a woman, asked his armour-bearer to kill him (Judges 8:54, 56).
– (ii) Saul, also severely wounded, fell on his own sword and died (1 Sam. 31:5; 1 Chron. 10:4-5 cf. 1 Chron. 10:14; 1 Sam. 28:16).
– (iii) Ahithophel, the counsellor of Absalom hanged himself (2 Sam. 17:23 cf. v. 14).
(iv) Zimri, king of Israel for one week, burn down the palace over himself (1 Kings 16:18, 19).
– (v) Judas Iscariot hanged himself after betraying the Lord (Matt. 27:5 cf. Acts 1:15-20).
4. Some godly men wished to die but did not take their own lives. Instead, they received blessing from God — Job (Job 3:11, 20-21 cf. 40:2; 42:12-17); Moses (Num. 11:15 cf. vv. 16-17, 24-25); Elijah (1 Kings 19:4 cf. vv. 5ff; 2 Kings 2:11); Jonah sacrificed himself but was divinely delivered (Jon. 1:12 cf. v. 17; 2:10). Jonah later wanted to die (Jon. 4:1-3) but God exposed his lack of compassion (Jon. 410-11). The Philippian jailor was about to kill himself when stopped by Paul and found salvation in Christ (Acts 16:27-28, 30-34).
– God creates life and sustains life (cf. John 10:10). Our Catechism says, “What is required in the sixth commandment?” “The sixth commandment requires all lawful endeavours to preserve our own life and the life of others, while forbidding whatever that tends towards taking away human life unjustly.”
IV. Practical implications.
1. The believer has no right to take his/her own life. Suicidal thoughts are temptations from the devil. We must put on the whole armour of God, and especially use the shield of faith “to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one” (Eph. 6:16). “Resist the devil and he will flee from you (James 4:7).” Those prone to depression must draw near to God (Psalm 34:18), and submit their trials to God in prayer (Phil. 4:6-7). The Lord gives peace to those who trust in Him (John 14:27; Rom. 8:38-39).
2. It is not for us to say that believers will never be prone to suicidal thoughts, or that those who took their own lives were not true believers and therefore lost. Love requires that we be sensitive to those who are desperate for help and minister to them as best we can (Rom. 13:8).
Questions
1. How would you counsel a believer who makes it known that he/she has entertained thoughts of suicide?
2. Post-natal medical checkups should be accompanied by the husband, quite part from the consideration of possible post-natal depression in the wife. Do you agree? Why?
3. Who should have the greater responsibility to take care of a depressive person: (i) the person himself; (ii) his family members; (iii) the church of which he is a member; (iv) state institutions?
References:
1. Suicide: A tragedy or A Crime? https://www.umlawreview.com/lex-in-breve/suicide-a-tragedy-or-a-crime.
2. Suicide Data: https://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suicideprevent/en/.
3. Over 2,000 suicide cases in the past four years: https://www.nst.com.my/news/exclusive/2018/08/404930/exclusive-over-2000-suicide-cases-past-four-years-nsttv.
4. Carpiniello, B. & Pinna, F, “The Reciprocal Relationship between Suicidality and Stigma”, Frontiers in Psychiatry 8 March 2017, 28 January 2019 < https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00035>.
5. Mental Health: https://www.who.int/mental_health/maternal-child/maternal_mental_health/en/
_________________________________________________________________
2019/2-15: Genetic Engineering (Gen. 1:24-31)
Modern biology began with the work of the Augustinian friar Gregor Johann Mendel. His work on pea plants, published in 1866, concerned a theory of heredity which is now Mendelian inheritance. The work of Mendel was rediscovered by Carl Correns and Erich von Tschermak which was then extended to the fruit fly and other organism. The double helical structure of DNA was discovered by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953, marking the transition to the era of molecular genetics. Further research led to the cracking of the genetic code — the set of rules used by living cells to translate information encoded within genetic material (DNA or microRNA sequences) into proteins. By the 1970’s the discipline of genetic engineering was well-established.
I. Some definitions
1. Genetic engineering: the direct manipulation of an organism’s genes using biotechnology. In the nucleus of each human cell (except for gametes, i.e. sperm or egg cells), there are 46 chromosomes which carry the basic units of heredity called genes. Each gene consists deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms. This includes negative and positive eugenics.
2. Eugenics: a term invented by Francis Galton in 1883, the essence of which is to encourage the reproduction of the select.
3. Negative eugenics: procedures that involve the elimination of defective genes and hence the prospective possessors of these genes, before birth but after conception. Foetal diagnosis is done by withdrawing some of the amniotic fluid and examining the skin cells shed by the foetus for possible genetic defects. Abortion is carried out when defects are found (known as ‘therapeutic abortion’).
4. Positive eugenics: control is done before conception with the intention of producing an individual who differs in some important respects from the individual who would have resulted without this intervention.
II. Techniques in Genetic Engineering
1. ‘In vitrio’ fertilisation (I.V.F.): the fertilisation of human eggs outside the body. In 1978 the first “test-tube baby” was born at Oldham, England, as a result of the work of British gynaecologist Patrick Steptoe and scientist Robert Edwards. Since then, other test-tube babies have been born in other parts of the world.
2. Artificial insemination by a donor (A. I. D.): Sperm from numerous donors are stored in liquid nitrogen at very low temperatures to build up sperm banks. The sperms are coded (classified) according to donor characteristics, making available the closest possible match in physical and mental characteristics between the husband and the donor.
3. Recombination DNA technology: the designing and creating of combinations of genes in ways quite different from that found in nature. Certain types of enzyme are used to rearrange genetic material in combinations unlikely to occur under natural circumstances. The restrictions of laws and ethics have prevented unfettered experimentation in this area.
4. Cloning: the production of carbon-copies of individuals by asexual reproduction. This is accomplished by the removal of the nucleus from a mature but unfertilised egg and replacing it with the nucleus of a specialised body cell of an adult organism. The egg with the transplanted nucleus proceeds to develop as if it has been fertilised, producing an adult organism that is genetically identical to the donor organism. The first successful cloned sheep, called Dolly, was born in 1997 in Scotland. It lived six years.
III. Possible Applications
1. ‘In vitrio’ fertilisation:
(a) Overcoming infertility brought about by a blockage in the wife’s uterine tubes;
(b) The sexing of embryos to produce a boy or a girl according to the parents’ wish;
(c) Producing only females in sex-linked genetic disorders since only males suffer from them, although they are transmitted through females, e.g. colour blindness, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, haemophilia.
2. A.I.D.
(a) One way of producing children for childless couples;
(b) Since the donors are screened, A.I.D. births have a lower-than-expected number of abnormalities;
(c) The characteristics of the child can be determined to see degree by choosing from donors. e.g. responsible citizens with acceptable IQ.
3. Recombination DNA technology:
(a) Possibility of correcting genetic deficiency diseases, e.g. replacing a defective gene with a normal one;
(b) Provides crop plants with genes for nitrogen fixation so as to dispense with nitrogen fertilisers;
(c) Constructing new bacteria staring for tasks such as digestion of oil spills;
(d) Producing “vegetanimals”, plants with animal proteins.
4. Cloning:
(a) It makes easier organ transplantation between members of a clone, as there will be no problems of rejection of the donated organs;
(b) It is one way of selecting the sex of a child, since all members of a clone are of the same sex.
IV. A Christian Response
1. On ‘in vitrio’ fertilisation:
– (a) All experimentation on fertilised human eggs as life begins when an egg is fertilised (see on “Abortion”).
– (b) We sympathise with apparently infertile married couples, but reject methods of cure that involve destruction of the fertilised human eggs. There is the option of intrauterine insemination (IUI), a slightly less expensive and less invasive fertility treatment than in vitro fertilisation. For IUI, a doctor places sperm – often from a donor – inside a woman’s uterus. We reject the use of donor sperm and accept only the husband’s.
– (c) Procreation is to be carried out by the coming together of husband and wife within the marriage relationship, not by the intervention of a third party (Gen. 1:27-28). This does not rule out the treatment of maladies.
– (d) Negative eugenics is to be rejected (see on “Abortion”).
2. On A.I.D.:
– (a) Fertilisation by a donor, by whatever method, is breath of the sacredness & uniqueness of the marriage bond, and ultimately has the same effect as adultery, viz. having an illegitimate child.
– (b) It is repugnant to conservative Christians to produce gametes or embryos for sale or storage.
– (c) A.I.H. (Artificial Insemination by the Husband) after his death is to rejected because the marriage bond is broken at death (Rom. 7:2).
– (d) Surrogate motherhood, or womb-leasing, is clearly contrary to the biblical principles of marriage and child-bearing.
3. On Recombinant DNA technology:
– (a) When it comes to therapeutic uses, Christians have a God-given responsibility to get involved and also to check its abuse (Gen. 1:28; Matt. 5:13-16).
– Biblical principles forbid any attempt at trans-species fertilisation involving human gametes, and indeed animals as well (Lev. 20:16; Gen. 1:25).
– Experimentation with fertilised human eggs with the consequent destruction of these should be condemned.
4. On cloning:
– (a) Asexual reproduction of human beings is not the biblical way. Procreation is separated from sexual relationship, and parenthood is separated from marriage.
– (b) Cloning attempts to produce individuals with specific characteristics for specific functions. This is dehumanisation, contrary to the biblical teaching on individual uniqueness and dignity (Gen. 1:27, etc.).
5. Other considerations:
– (a) Alleviating suffering and curing sickness is one thing, trying to improve the ‘quality’ of man is another. Man is under the curse of God, and cannot be brought to ‘greater perfection’ by man (Gen. 3:14-19; Rom. 8:18-25).
– (b) Christ took upon Himself real human nature, albeit a perfect one, and maintains His humanity in heaven (1 Tim. 2:5). He redeems the present fallen race. Perfection all-round is to be found in heaven. There is no place for manipulating individuals at the genetic level to produce an improved, and even novel, being.
– (c) More often than not, the reasons for biological modification are grounded in what man can do than what is needed. In short, man wants to be like God (Gen. 3:5; 11:4).
Questions
1. How would you respond to someone who turns out to have been a “test-tube baby”?
2. A childless couple longs to have a child. What is your advice to them?
3. What possible difficulties might a Christian face if he/she is involved in genetic engineering research?
_________________________________________________________________
2019/2-16: Contraception (Gen. 38:1-11)
Is it right for Christians to use birth control methods to limit the number of children? How many children is the “right” number? Is it right not to have children at all? Is it right not to limit the number of children? What factors and/or principles should determine the type of birth control?
– Some Christians have strong views about these questions. The majority are largely ignorant about these, following the examples of their peers or the advice of “mature Christians” in their churches.
– Contraception refers to methods of preventing conception in a woman who is fertile and sexually active. Biblically, sexual relationship is allowed only in marriage.
– Contraception, therefore, is meant for married people to regulate or limit the number of children they intend to have.
I. Biblical teaching on the family.
1. Children are a gift from God (Gen. 4:1; 33:5), a heritage from the Lord (Psalm 127:3-5), a crown to the aged (Prov. 17:6), and a blessing from God (Luke 1:42).
– Attached to the creation mandate to mankind is the command, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it” (Gen. 1:28).
– Barren women were blessed with children, e.g. Sarah (Gen. 21:1-3), Rebecca (Gen. 25:21-22), Rachel (Gen. 30:22-24), Hannah (1 Sam. 1:19-20), Elizabeth (Luke 1:7, 24-25).
= It is right and natural for married couples to desire children. It is not our right to demand for children from God, or to have normal children. How thankful we should be if we have normal children!
2. How many children are needed to constitute being fruitful? Ps. 127:3-5 says “a quiver full”, i.e 10 to 30 arrows literally — but when applied to the number of children, one would say at least five. As in gospel work, it is God who gives the increase (1 Cor. 3:6). In the Parable of the Sower, fruitfulness varies from a hundredfold, to sixtyfold, and to thirtyfold (Matt. 13:8). As a general rule, it is more blessed to have more children, while it is irresponsible to have too many children such that the health of the mother is affected and service to the Lord is hindered 9cf. 1 Cor. 7:32-35).
– Some Christians of the paedobaptist persuasion believe in producing “covenant children”. They should not disdain others who do not hold to their view. Others should not criticise them for their view (Rom. 14:12-13).
– Other factors should be considered, e.g. circumstances of life, health, finance, etc. A missionary couple might want to limit the number of children because of hazards in the mission field. A big family would also requires higher financial support. A couple who are both carriers of thalassaemia B, for example, might decide not to have children but opt for adoption instead. A woman who have had caesarian section should be careful about having additional children.
– The age of the mother may be a limiting factor. Scientifically, it is known that a woman’s risk of conceiving a child with Down syndrome increases after 35 years of age. A woman conceiving at age 25 has a likelihood of 1 in 1,250 having a Down syndrome child. The likelihood increases to 1 in 100 for a woman who conceives at age 40. It is advisable to have all the children you want by the time the wife is 35 or 36 years old.
3. A woman remains fertile until after menopause, at about age 50, when she stops menstruating. No contraception will be needed post-menopause, i.e. after at least 12 months of not having menstruation.
– A woman who is breastfeeding will be naturally infertile for the first six months after birth, and will remain infertile as long as there is regular breastfeeding and her menstrual periods have not returned.
– Contraception will be needed to prevent having another baby, or for spacing out the next baby. Scripture does not condemn nor condone contraception. The closest it comes to on this matter is the case of Tamar, Judah’s daugther-in-law (Gen. 38:1-11). Judah’s son, Er, married a woman called Tamar. Er was executed by the Lord for some unspecified wickedness. Tamar was given to his brother, Onan, to produce a son for Er by the law of levirate marriage (Deut. 25:5-6). Onan did not want to share his inheritance with his late brother’s family, so he practised the oldest form of birth control, withdrawal (‘coitus interruptus’). God executed Onan for his selfish motive behind the action, and not for the act of contraception.
II. Principles and factors affecting contraception.
1. Ethically, the method of contraception should not result in the destruction of fertilised eggs, regardless of whether the eggs have attached to the wall of the womb. The fertilised egg contains the DNA of an individual, although the body parts are not yet formed (cf. Psalm 139:16). Preventing a fertilised egg from implanting is like refusing to give milk to a newborn baby.
– Apart from this, there is nothing specifically unscriptural about preventing ovulation or preventing the fertilisation of an egg. Neither an egg nor a sperm is a person.
2. Applying these principles to the various methods of birth control:
– (i) Coitus Interruptus: This is often practised by those who engage in illicit sex. Couples generally do not like this as it interrupts their legitimate enjoyment of the sexual relationship.
– (ii) Condoms and diaphragms: A condom is a rubber or silicon sheath used by men. Men reluctantly use it as it reduces tactile sensitivity and cuts down pleasure. The condom is easily available in any pharmacy or convenience store. A diaphragm is a reusable dome-shaped cup which fits over the opening of the cervix of a woman. It is common to use a diaphragm with spermicide. This is a gel, cream, or foam that kills sperm. A doctor is consulted who measures the size and type of diaphragm best suited to the woman.
– (iii) The intra-uterine device (IUD): This is a small copper mesh inserted into the cervix, usually by a doctor. It works by releasing copper into the uterus and fallopian tubes, which acts as a spermicide. Additionally, it kills off a fertilised egg which manages to develop.
– (iv) The pill: Birth control pills are prescribed and taken once a day. The hormones in the pill stop ovulation, so that there is no egg hanging around for the sperms to fertilise. The pill’s hormones also thicken the mucus on the cervix which blocks sperm so it can’t swim to an egg.
– (v) The Rhythm method (also known as Fertility Awareness Method): In this method, the previous menstrual cycles are tracked on a calendar to predict future ovulation dates. There is abstention from sex (periodic abstinence) during the most fertile days, or the condom is used by the man during this period.
– (vi) Tubal ligation and vasectomy: Tubal ligation is a permanent form of contraception or birth control in which the Fallopian tubes are tied by a surgical procedure. This prevents the egg in the ovary from travelling down to the uterus. Reversing the procedure is possible but expensive and rates of conception are often decreased. Vasectomy is a simple surgical procedure done in a man in which the two tubes that allow sperm to get into the semen are cut and sealed. Today, micro-surgery allows for a reversal of the procedure so that the man may father a child again. TL or vasectomy are carried out by couples who decide to stop having more children.
3. Of all the methods here considered, the use of IUD has to be rejected as it kills off fertilised eggs.
– Those with one or two children should think carefully before choosing permanent contraception. Changes in circumstances of life, e.g. the unexpected death of a child, might cause them to want another child.
– The use of the pill in between having children is often sufficient and safe until the desired number of children is achieved, when TL or vasectomy may be considered.
– Those who have had TL or vasectomy must guard against the temptation to infidelity. This warning especially applies to men. Articles on this subject often give the warning that TL and vasectomy do not prevent one from contracting STD (sexually transmitted diseases). This is tacit admittance of the higher level of temptation to such.
= Psalm 127 holds true in any age and culture. Those who are not married or are unable to have children should seek fulfilment in being spiritual parents to others —by winning souls to Christ, and by caring for nephews and nieces, and children in church. Cf. Matt. 19:11-12.
|
Questions
1. Discuss the three categories of eunuchs in Matt. 19:11-12. What are some practical implications?
2. “Having fewer children equals quality living.” Discuss.
3. How would having too many children hinder service to God? Cf. 1 Cor. 7:32-35.
_________________________________________________________________
2019/2-17: Drug Taking And Smoking (2 Tim. 1:3-7)
At least three points may be noted from 2 Tim. 1:3-7 shows that: (i) we must have genuine faith; (ii) our gifts are to be stirred up and used in God’s service; (iii) all three faculties of the personality are to be in good health. Drug taking will affect the person of faith in his/her service to God because his/her personality will be adversely affected.
– Most Christians would avoid addiction to drugs because of the obvious harmful effects. It is not much of an ethical issue until recent days. As with issues such as LGBT and abortion, there has been tremendous pressure exerted to legitimise and to legalise the wider use of drugs, often under the guise of therapy and individual rights. The term “recreational drug use” has been coined.
– In western countries, drug addiction was associated with the rise of the hippies, the Woodstock festival, and pop-music in the mid-1960s.
– In the east, the British East India Company introduced Indian opium to China in the late 18th century. It earned good revenue for the British but caused 10-12 million addictions in China, and devastated especially the costal cities of China. It led to the two Opium Wars and the ceding of a number of costal areas to the British and other western countries. Economics and politics did not take into consideration ethics. There is also the Golden Triangle — a mountainous region encompassing parts of Myanmar, Thailand and Laos which produces opium and heroin. It was ruled by the private army of one Khun Sa for a long time.
I. Types of drugs.
1. Drugs may be classified under four categories: (i) stimulants (e.g. cocaine); (ii) depressants (e.g. alcohol); (iii) painkillers (e.g. heroin); (iv) hallucinogens (e.g. LSD). Some drugs, under controlled usage, are used as medicine. All medicines are drugs, but not all drugs are medicines. Addictive, illegal drugs are often referred to as narcotics. Our concern is with the abuses of drugs.
– Addictive drugs cause people to act irrationally, affect appetite, and destroy health. A drug addict craves for more of the drug when the effects wear off. He is unable to function well at work, and might turn to crime to get money to buy more drug. Addiction cause family breakdowns and about many social ills.
– Drugs can be taken in various forms: swallowed, inhaled, or injected. Many of them are made from plants.
2. Some of the main drugs are:
– Heroin: Refined from opium, it is used as a painkiller known as morphine. When further refined, it becomes the highly addictive drug, heroin. White tablets that are swallowed, or in liquid form to be injected into a muscle or a vein. Occasionally sniffed or smoked.
: The effect is an initial sense of pleasure, followed by explosive excitement. Then, a feeling of relaxation and eventually, sleep. During the ‘experience’ all fears and tensions are gone. After a person has been on heroin for some time there is no more pleasurable sensation. Most addicts have to have a ‘fix’ every four hours to stay comfortable.
: In cases of withdrawal (e.e. if an addict gives up heroin), there are terrible effects. After 4 hours, a dreadful craving and sense of anxiety. After 8 hours, sweating, running eyes and nose. After 12 hours, dilated pupils. From 18-24 hours, fever. From 24-36 hours, danger to life.
– Cannabis (ganja): Made from a plant that grows to a height of 14 to 15 ft in hot, dry countries. The leaves are dried and chopped up (marijuana), or the sticky brown raisin is made into a brown cake (harshish). Usually made into a hand-rolled cigarette, or smoked in a pipe.
: The usual effect is lightheadedness and giggling, followed by drowsiness. Music becomes more enjoyable, food more exciting. Hallucinations are experienced — sometimes pleasant, sometimes horrific. Often, there is anxiety and distorted perception. The person cannot think clearly, has poor concentration, and is generally unable to cope with the everyday business of living. He is often sick and lethargic.
: There is no ‘hangover’ afterwards. A cannabis smoker does not become dependent physically (as with heroin), but dependent psychologically, in outlook and state of mind.
Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD): Made from the fungus of rye. Can be bought as liquid, pills, or powder. Can be taken as a tablet, on a sugar lump, as a biscuit, or in a drink.
: The effects include the senses becoming mixed. New things are experienced (known as ‘going on a trip’), sometimes beautiful, sometimes terrifying. At times there is the feeling of being able to fly, or that nothing can cause any harm. This may lead to fatal accidents. The person may experience a second ‘trip’ hours, or even weeks, later. He can become very depressed and troubled with distressing feelings of unreality, e.g. fleeing from fancied persecutors.
: The person does not become dependent physically on the drug, but his life becomes radically altered because of the hallucinations.
– Cocaine: A white powder made from leaves. Taken by sniffing, or swallowed, or made into a solution and injected.
: Effects include the person becoming excited, more energetic, and feels good. There is the hazard of itching and strange sensations of the skin. When injected directly into the bloodstream or inhaled it has an extremely stimulating sensation followed by depression.
: Physical dependence does not occur but psychological dependence may be intense.
– Opium (candu): Made from the latex of the opium poppy. Sold as a brown, sticky substance and smoked through a special pipe. Can be used to dull pain and induce sleep. After each dose, the addict feels high-spirited and everything looks bright. This is followed by drowsiness which may lead to unconsciousness and sweating if there is overdose. Misery, remorse and despair then set in. The craving for the drug grows, there is loss of appetite, leading to the typical sallow-faced and emaciated (‘skinny’) figure of the opium smoker.
– Amphetamine (‘Purple hearts’): This is a stimulant, sometimes called pep pills. Once widely used medically as an anti-depressant and also to suppress appetite in cases of obesity.
: The person feels buoyed up, confident, more cheerful. Heavy doses causes irritability, even violence. There is also the risk of mental illness in which the person is beset with ideas of persecution, becomes restless and excited, and may hear imaginary voices. The regular taker is likely to be restless, over talkative, over-excited and cheerful. This mood gives way to sudden to one of sullen, irritable depression.
: Immunity to the drug develops so quickly that larger and larger doses are needed and the drug taker can reach a state where he just aimlessly prowls around.
: Barbiturates, a highly addictive drug, is sometimes combined with amphetamines in ‘purple hearts’. Once widely used in medicine to help sleep and relieve anxiety. The regular user may become confused and very emotional, his speech slurred, his walk unsteady. Sudden withdrawal may cause anxiety, trembling, nausea, sleeplessness, and in extreme cases, convulsions and death.
– Glue sniffing: Vapour from glue (or other substance) is inhaled. After a few deep breaths the person feels very cheery and exhilarated, and for up to 3/4 of an hour there is slurred speech and disturbance or movements. Hallucination, sometimes amor a few hours, or even days. In high enough concentrations, glue sniffing can cause severe brain damage and even death.
: Glue sniffing is a special danger to children because it appears so innocent and the substances are so easily obtained.
– Nicotine: This is found in tobacco leaves and is the cause of addiction to smoking and tobacco chewing. Withdrawal symptoms include irritability, fatigue, insomnia, feeling depressed, tightness in the chest, stomach pain, constipation, etc. Severity varies but seldom lasts more then 4 weeks. Relapse may occur unless a change of lifestyle accompanies quitting the smoking habit, e.g. taking up a hobby, minimising contact with smoking friends, etc.
II. The Christian response.
1. It is obvious that drug taking causes harm to the body. Apart from the harm from the drug itself, injections with dirty needles and syringes cause local infections, blood poisoning, hepatitis, AIDS. There is also the great difficulty and pain involved in curing an addict. No true Christian can ever consider taking drugs. Abusing the mind and body, and losing control of the senses, is not living to the glory of God (Prov. 1:10; 4:14-15; 1 Cor. 6:19-20; 10:31; Rev. 7:15).
2. Why do people turn to drugs? (i) The craving for happiness; (ii) to escape from troubles among adults; (iii) peer pressure and the desire to be accepted; (iv) escape from insecurity, disappointments, frustration among young people; (v) the ‘pusher’ or pedlar who make big money from the sale of drugs. International syndicates engage ‘drug mules’ to smuggle drugs across borders, resulting in many naive people being arrested. Parents must warn and educate their children. The church has the opportunity of reaching out to the many who are in need. Christians can approve of the medicinal us of drugs, but not the recreational use of drugs. Drug taking is dehumanising, as it harms all three faculties of the human personality.
2. The well-known preacher C H Spurgeon was a smoker, in an age when smoking was regarded as socially and morally acceptable. Another well-known preacher, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, smoked for a period of time, until he realised he was “not free” from the habit. Committing himself to God, he stopped smoking immediately. Today, smoking is regarded as socially unacceptable, as it causes others to be “secondary smokers”. The harmful effects of smoking to health is widely publicised. Christians should not smoke for the same reasons as not taking other drugs.
3. The gospel alone will meet the deep needs of those who turn drugs (Rom. 1:16; Mark 5:1-20). Drug addicts have been known to be cured by the power of Christ through the gospel. There are Christian organisations that specialises in curing and rehabilitating drug addicts. (In Malaysia: Kenosis Home; Burning Bush, Lifeline Drug Rehabilitation Centres.)
Questions
1. Some countries impose the death penalty upon those who traffic in drugs. Does the punishment match the crime? How effective is the deterrent effect of such laws? Suggest some ways the church might minister to drug addicts and those who are under rehabilitation.
2. How should we react to communities that still regard smoking and tobacco chewing as socially acceptable? How should we handle someone who comes to church regularly but has to go out of the premises on-and-off to have a smoke?
3. Helping a stranger to carry luggage across the customs check point is a definite “no-no”. Wouldn’t we come across as unfriendly and unhelpful? Wouldn’t we miss the opportunity to bear witness to him/her?
_________________________________________________________________
2019/2-18: Alcoholism (1 Cor. 11:17-22)
The adverse effects of alcoholism are well-known, causing misery to the drinkers and others. At the same time, there are numberless people who enjoy drinking wine without becoming drunk.
– All Christians are united in condemning and avoiding alcoholism, i.e. getting drunk and/or addicted to drinking. Christians are divided over whether to abstain or to allow for drinking in moderation.
I. Some Introductory Facts
1. A wine drinker need not be an alcoholic, while an alcoholic is certainly a drinker. If a drug is defined as any substance that acts on the central nervous system, then wine is a drug. However, there is the medicinal use of drug under controlled situations and the abuse of drugs that is associated with addiction. It is not a drug, however. Wine is widely consumed as a beverage and used an ingredient in cooking. ‘Wine’ is used here in its broadest sense to cover any drink that contains alcohol.
2. In all countries where drinking is not prohibited by law, there is the problem of alcoholism. Alcoholism affects the alcoholic and his family — the wife is angry with the drunkard husband, limited fund is squandered in drinking, the children experience mental stress due to family quarrels, studies are affected, there is the embarrassment of having an alcoholic in the family, etc.
3. Medically speaking, the effects of alcoholism include:
(i) Impairment of personality and efficiency. Alcoholics experience amnesia (loss of memory), or blackouts after drinking.
(ii) A variety of syndromes might follow. ‘Delirium tremens’ is an acute confusional state showing all the features of delirium together with tremors of the limbs. The Korsakoff syndrome is a condition in which there is marked memory failure of recent events and a tendency to join up different events to fill in the gaps of memory.
(iii) Prolonged alcoholism may result in dementia (going ‘out of mind’) or may result in various psychiatric syndromes such as paranoia (fears) and hallucinations. Cirrhosis of the liver (fibrous tissue forming) may occur. Alcoholic mothers will produce alcoholic babies.
(iv) Moonshine, i.e. home-distilled liquor, from fermenting mashed fruit or cereal with yeast, contains ethanol mixed with methanol. The methanol in the product can cause blindness and death.
4. The treatment of alcoholism is first to get the patient into hospital to be ‘dried out’. During this process of withdrawal from alcohol, drugs are used to relief emotional stress. The drying out process is followed by psychotherapy in the form of individual or group therapy. The patient is often helped by organisations such as Alcoholism Anonymous to prevent relapse. Patients who need additional support might be given certain drugs — such as disulfiram (brand name ‘Antabuse’) or calcium carbimide (or ‘Temposil’) — which interact with ingested alcohol to produce unpleasant symptoms such as headache, nausea, vomiting, etc. As with drug addiction, alcoholics have been converted by the power of the gospel to stop drinking totally and live useful lives.
II. The Bible’s Teaching
1. The Abstention view:
– (i) It is argued that wine drinking was tolerated but not approved of in the Bible, until it is revealed as forbidden in the NT — just like war, slavery and polygamy. The proof for this assertion is lacking while the argument from the increase in alcohol content in wine historically does not constitute proof. It is claimed that the wine in the times of the Bible was of low alcoholic content (how low we do not know) and often taken diluted. With the discovery of distillation in 8th century AD, the wine from fermentation could be distilled to obtain spirits, i.e. wine with alcohol content as high as 40%. Drinking wine today is therefore different from what happened in biblical times, e.g. lager, ale and stout contains 3-8% alcohol; table wines contain 8-12%; Sherry, Port, Vermouth 15-20%; Brandy, Whisky, Vodka 40% and above.
– (ii) In the OT, the priests were prohibited from drinking alcohol while engaged in tabernacle duties (Lev. 10:8-11). Kings and princes were exhorted to abstain from wine lest they forgot God’s law and failed in their duties (Prov. 31:4-6). Since we have been made priests and kings to God (Rev. 1:6; 5:10; 1 Pet. 2:9), we must abstain from wine as well. To combine a theological truth with physical consumption of wine does not come across convincing.
– (iii) It is argued that Paul, Timothy, and other preachers abstained from wine, except for medical purposes (1 Tim. 5:23). We are to follow the examples set by Paul and the early preachers (1 Cor. 11:1; Phil. 3:17; 2 Thess. 3:9). While Timothy only drank water until told by Paul to drink some wine, is this indication that Paul and all gospel preachers of that time abstained from wine? This would be drawing too much out of the passage. In fact, we may draw the conclusion that Paul had been taking wine for stomach problems and was advocating the same for Timothy. In the same way, we would not claim dogmatically that the Lord did drink wine in Luke 7:33-34. Furthermore, to demand the same degree of commitment in gospel service from all Christians would be to overstretch the argument.
– (iv) Wine is the symbol of evil in the NT (Rev. 14:8, 10). Since so much evil is connected with consumption of alcoholic drinks, Christians should abstain totally (Rom. 14:15, 21; 1 Thess. 5:22; 1 Cor. 6: 12; 10:6). This throwing away the baby with the bathwater.
2. The Moderation view:
– (i) Wine was used in the drink offering in the tabernacle (Exod. 29:40). Wine is not mentioned as part of the Passover feast in the OT (however, cf. Gen. 14:18). By the time of the Romans, the Jewish Mishnah (authoritative interpretations) says that the four cups used in the Passover was diluted wine.
– (ii) Wine is both a symbol of blessing (Gen. 27:28; Psalm 104:14-15; Prov. 3:10; 9:2, 5; Isa. 25:6; 55:1; Jer. 31:12) and cursing (Psalm 75:8; Jer. 25:15; Rev. 14:8, 10; 17:2, 6). It is also a symbol of rejoicing (Eccl. 10:19; John 2:9-10). Wine is a beverage and an important ingredient in cooking. To draw too sharp a distinction between taking it as food and drinking it for fun would be to focus on trivial matters like the Pharisees. One can drink too much of wine with low alcohol content and get drunk, while another may dilute strong wine and drink less so as to keep clear from becoming drunk.
– (iii) The Lord changed water into wine (John 2:9, 10). On more than one occasions He used wine to illustrate His teaching (e.g. Mark 2:22). The institution of the Lord’s Supper involved drinking diluted wine, which was wine nevertheless. Drinking was permitted (1 Cor. 11:22) while drunkenness is warn against (Prov. 23:20; 31:4-5; Lev. 10:9-10; Eph. 5:18; 1 Cor. 5:11; 6:10).
9. (iv) Liberty of conscience is the broader principle upon which the other principles rest, e.g. not stumbling others, abstaining from evil. It runs parallel to doing all things to God’s glory (Rom. 14:16-17; 1 Cor. 10:31-32).
3. The Moderation view may be further subdivided into the regular drinkers, the occasional drinkers, and the voluntary abstainers. One takes pleasure in drinking and drinks wine regularly, perhaps after dinner. The other drinks only when the occasion calls for it, e.g. during wedding banquets. The last abstains totally for personal reasons, ingesting alcohol only in the form of food, but holding on to the Moderation view.
– It is important to exercise self-control. Harming the body and suppressing the mind is out of the question (1 Cor. 6:19-20; 2 Tim. 1:7; John 8:32; Gal.5:1; Eph. 5:18). We are free in Christ, from bondage to sin, to addiction, to man-made rules.
– Anything pleasurable may become addictive, including drinking. Those committed to serve the Lord are advised to abstain from wine, apart from consuming it in dishes and fermented food, e.g. kimchi (fermented vegetables), tapai ubi (fermented tapiocca), etc. See Judg. 13:7; Prov. 31:4-5; Lev. 10:9-10; Luke 1:15; Eph. 5:15-18; 1 Tim. 3:8; Tit. 2:3. We want to maintain effective service to the Lord and avoid being a stumbling block to others,
– We avoid using wine in the Lord’s Supper and use unfermented grape juice instead, to avoid abuse and in order not to stumble anyone who holds to a different view on drinking. While certain that diluted wine was used in the institution of the Lord’s Supper, the description used is “the fruit of the vine” (Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18) and “the cup” (1 Cor. 11:25, 26) — indicating that non-fermented juice may be used.
= The Bible gives more space to the danger of wine than to its benefit. We advocate drinking occasionally in moderation, and encourage voluntary abstention in the pursuit of spirituality — “Do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18).”
Questions
1. There are those who claim that they have to drink because of the nature of their job, viz. to entertain clients, to meet social expectations, etc. What does this say of: (i) their attitude; (ii) their witness to non-believers; (iii) their witness to believers?
2. Would a church member who has a reputation for enjoying the drinking of wine, but never gets drunk, be qualified to hold office as an elder or a deacon? Cf. 1 Tim. 3:1-13; Tit. 1:5-9.
3. Should a Christian couple serve wine during their wedding banquet? Why? What possible criticisms might they encounter?
_________________________________________________________________
Ethics19: Cremation ( 1 Cor. 15:35-49)
o More and more people are opting for cremation of the dead instead of burial. Reasons include; (i)
the scarcity of burial land in places like Singapore and Hong Kong; (ii) the influence of the
Buddhist and Hindu practices of cremation; (iii) the sentimental ideas prorated by soap operas and
film shows showing the scattering of the ashes of the cremated in the sea or in the garden.
– Death comes to everyone. What is our view about cremation and burial?
I. Introductory facts.
Cremation is an ancient custom of the Hindus. and Buddhists. Introduced to the western world by the Greeks in about 1000 BC. It became the status symbol for military heroes. By 100 AD, with the spread of Christianity, it more or less ceased in the West.
In Tibet, cremation is reserved for the high lamas. In Laos, it is for those who die ‘fortunately’, i.e. due to natural causes at the end of a peaceful and prosperous life. In Bali, under Hindu influence, it is an elaborate ceremony for the chiefs, the body being embalmed and cremated on a erect tower.
2. In the 19th century, cremation in a modernised form was revived int he West using modern
technology. The practice has spread to the East.
The body, with or without the coffin, is glided into an electric furnace by mechanical means through self-closing doors. The intense heat transforms everything into a white powdery ash in and hour or two. The ash is then scooped up and stored in an urn (a jar).
The ash is placed in cubicles in a columbarium – a room or building with niches for funeral urns to be stored, often attached to a crematorium or a cemetery (of the modern kind, operated as a business).
The ash may also be disposed off according to sentiment or religious beliefs: scattered in a garden or in the sea, kept at home of in a temple, or buried.
Cremation is gaining popularity in Europe, Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore, and increasingly in Malaysia.
II. The Bible’s teaching.
1. In the Scripture, ‘burning’ often carries the idea of displeasure or contempt. It sometimes carries the thought of removing rubbish or unwanted material, and also judgement and desolation. Burning of bodies in particularly is associated with the judgement of God.
In the OT, see Gen. 38:24; Exod. 12:10; Lev. 21:9; Deut. 32:22; 1 Kings 15:13; Jer. 21:10; Amos 2:1-2; Mal. 4:1; and esp. Josh. 7:15, 25; 1 Kings 13:1-3; 2 Kings 23:15-18.
In the NT, see Matt. 13:30; Luke 3:17; John 15:6; Heb. 6:8.
2. The Scripture gives many examples of burial, particularly of godly people, and of the care attended to it. The overall teaching of Scripture favours burial.
In the OT, see Gen. 23; 25:8-10; 35:29 cf. 49:31; Gen. 47:29-31 cf. 49:29-33 & 50:4-13; Gen. 50:24-26 cf. Exod. 13:19 & Josh. 24:32; Num. 20:1; Deut. 10:6; 34:5-6; 2 Sam. 4:32ff; 2 Sam. 21:11-14; 1 Kings 13:29-32; 1 Kings 14:13, 18; 2 Chron. 34:27-28; 35:24.
In the NT, see Matt. 14:12; Acts 5:1-10; 8:2.
Non-burial, like burning, was a mark of contempt, e.g. Deut. 28:25-26; 2 Kings 9:10; Psalm 79:1-4; Eccl. 6:3; Jer. 7:33; 16:6; 25:33; 34:20.
3. Christ’s own example of being buried should be followed. See Mark 14:8; Mark 15:42-47; Matt. 27:57ff; Luke 23:50ff; John 19;38ff.
The ordinance of baptism would lose its significance if Christ had not been buried. See Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12; Matt. 3:15-17.
4. The body is a seed to be sown in corruption, but raised in incorruption. This beautiful picture is lost in cremation. See 1 Cor. 15:35-39, 42-44, 55; John 12:24.
5. Man is not just an animal. He is created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27; 1 Cor. 1:7; James
3:9). Consigning the body which houses the image of God to the flames does not come across as
right.
Believers are not their own, but Christ’s. Both body and soul have been redeemed (1 Cor. 6:19-20).
III. Some conclusions.
The cumulative evidence of Scripture show that cremation is NOT for Christians. Burial is the right way of disposing of the body.
Aged believers should make it known to their family their desire to be buried. Perhaps to put in the will, “I direct that I be buried and not cremated.”
2. The arguments against cremation in no way limit God’s power to raise those who have been
cremated, buried in the sea, or whose bodies were destroyed in war.
Some Christians have died in fire that consumed their bodies, drowned at sea and eaten by fish, or died at the stake for their faith. Yet, God will raise them on the last day (Job 19:26; Matt. 25:31-33; Rev. 20:12-13).
By the same argument, unbelievers will not be able to escape God’s judgement by choosing cremation.
3. There is a proper place for the remembrance of the dead — in a memorial service at home or in
church, by visiting the grave, etc.
We do not pray for the souls of the dead like the Roman Catholics do, but we thank God for having given them to us for a time, and for all that the deceased had accomplished by God’s grace.
Normally, graves are visited up to the third generation. There are exceptions, especially for those who have accomplished a lot and touched many lives. Otherwise, the remains may be exhumed by the authorities to be placed at a columbarium, and the burial ground reused.
In countries where there is scarcity of land, Christians should abide by the law to cremate, unless exceptions have been made for those with religious convictions to bury. (It is like keeping the Christian Sabbath on Saturday in some countries where Sunday is a working day.)
Questions
1. Consider the arguments for cremation and against burial. How valid are they? What should Christians do in a situation where the law makes cremation mandatory?
2. A Christian sailor dies at sea, far from land. In the old days, the body would be buried at sea. Today, the body can be preserved and brought to land for burial. In exceptional situations, e.g. during a war, it is reasonable to ask for the body to be buried on land?
3. What benefits are there of visiting the grave of deceased, say, once a year? Is this mere sentimentalism or are there good reasons for the practice?
_________________________________________________________________
2019/2-20: Demons And The Occult (Eph. 6:10-20)
In the digital age (4th Industrial Revolution, age of AI), two extreme views on this subject to be avoided: (i) to be dismissive of its reality; (ii) to show more interest than is right. One extreme might be caused by idolising science and human ability. The other extreme might be caused by the spiritual void left by scientific and materialistic pursuits.
I. Demons are a reality.
1. The reality and power of evil spirits are taught in the Bible (e.g. Matt. 13:28; Eph. 6:12; 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6). These evil spirits are called ‘demons’, ‘fallen angels’, or ‘devils’. They all serve a leader called Satan (adversary), the Devil (slanderer); Apollyon (destroyer), and the Evil One (Job 1:6; Matt. 4:1; Rev. 9:11; 2 Cor. 6:15; Matt. 12:24; Rev. 12; Matt. 6:13).The chief characteristics of the Evil One are indicated by the various names used of him — powerful, malicious, cunning, hostile.
2. Satan and his agents constituted one-third of the angels created by God who revolted against God due to their arrogance and pride (Rev. 12:4; 1 Tim. 3:6; Jude 6). Each angel was created separately and there is no descent or procreation among them (Matt. 22:30). It follows that each apostate angel fell by himself, i.e. by his own personal choice. Humans, on the other hand, fell in their representative head, Adam, causing us to sin (Rom. 5:12ff.).
3. Demons constantly oppose God and strive to deflect His will, e.g. the temptation of Adam & Eve, the trials of Job, etc. They are opposed to man’s temporal and eternal welfare (Luke 13:11, 16; Acts 10:38; 2 Cor. 12:7; 1 Thess. 2:18). Yet they execute God’s plans in spite of themselves (1 Kings 22:23; 1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Tim. 1:20). The evil activities of Satan and his agents include:
(i) Physical afflictions, e.g. the woman bent double for 18 years (Luke 13:16); Job’s sore boils (Job 2:7), temptations of various forms, such as suggestions, doubts, desires, etc. (Eph. 6:10, 16; James 4:7; 1 John 2:16; 2 Cor. 2:11).
(ii) The use of the forces of nature in a limited way, e.g. lightning and wind against Job’s property and people (Job 1:16, 19); the winds and waves that were rebuked by the Lord, suggesting demonic activity (Mark 4:39).
(iii) The manipulation of nations, e.g. Dan. 10:13, 20; Eph. 6:12.
(iv) Introducing sin and the effects of sin, including death (1 Cor. 15:56; Heb. 2:14, 15; Eph. 2:2). Note, however, that the lives of the redeemed are not at the disposal of the devil directly or indirectly (Matt. 20:28; Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 6:20; 15:21).
(v) Spreading falsehood and apostasy (1 Tim. 4:1-3; 1 John 4:1-6; 2 Cor. 2:11; Rev. 2:9, 18-19; 3:9; 9:1-11).
II. Demon possession is a reality.
1. Mentioned 50 times in Matt., Mark, & Luke. Not mentioned in John, but it shares the overall view of Satanic power (e.g. John 7:20; 8:48-52; 10:20, 21). Demon possession is different from mental illness or other illnesses (Mark 1:32; Matt. 4:24; 8:16). In the NT we read of numerous cases of people who suffered from such afflictions as deafness, dumbness, and blindness, who were not possessed (Mark 7:32; John 9; Matt. 9:27; 20:30).
2. Demon possessed people freely confess that they are possessed (e.g. Mark 5:9) and their relatives agree (Matt. 15:22). From the many cases of possession recorded, the following may be said:
(i) Demon possession may be voluntary (those with ‘familiar spirits’, Acts 16:16-18), or involuntary (e.g. the Syro-Phoenician girl, Matt. 15:21-28, and the demoniac boy, Matt. 17:14-21).
(ii) There is no direct link between the character of the victim and his/her possession.
(iii) The possession may be sporadic or continuous (Luke 11:26).
(iv) Body and mind are affected. The demon speaks through the possessed person. Especially in involuntary possession, there may be mental abnormality, fits, superhuman strength, suicidal tendencies, and hostility towards others. Sometimes there is unusual recognition of the presence of Christ and an acute awareness of His person and authority.
(v) When deliverance comes, it is sudden.
3. It is impossible for Christians to be possessed, i.e. to be indwell by demons. A Christian is permanently indwell by the Holy Spirit and sealed for the day of redemption (Rom. 8:9; Eph. 4:30). He is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19). The One who is in him is greater than the one who is in the world ( 1 John 4:4). See also 2 Cor. 6:15; Rom. 8:38-39; Eph. 1:23; 1 John 5:18. When it is claimed that Christians have been possessed, we ask:
(i) Were the victims regenerate? Professing/nominal Christians can be possessed, but not a regenerate person.
(ii) Were they actually possessed? Hysteria, fits, mental illness, etc. need not be due to demon-possession. Other possible causes are emotional stress, physical exhaustion, imitation, psychological suggestion, etc.
III. Christ’s power over demons is a reality.
1. Jesus Christ conquered Satan and destroyed his power at the cross (John 12:31; Col. 2:14-15; Gen. 3:15). Satan is bound (Luke 11:20; Heb. 2:14; Rev. 20:1-3). He will do his worse to harm the church, but his power is certainly limited. Our Saviour is victorious. He is the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:9; Rev. 5:5). The Child born at Bethlehem is the “Mighty God” (Isa. 9:6). The Lamb of God who was sacrificed now goes forth “conquering and to conquer” (Rev. 6:2). Christians are not to fear demons or his power (cf. James 4:7; 2 Cor. 2:14).
2. Christians should guard against ‘capitulating to phenomena’, i.e. to allow our beliefs and methods to be governed by what is seen rather than by the Scriptures. Note:
(i) Just because demons have been cast out, even in the name of Jesus Christ, does not mean that the methods employed and the beliefs of those people are biblically correct. The Jews had exorcists (Luke 11:19) and exorcism is also seen in a pagan society like ours. Remember Matt. 7:21-23 and 2 Cor. 11:13-15.
(ii) ‘In the name of Jesus Christ’ is not a magical phrase, the very sound of which will terrify demons. Christ’s name stands for His character and His teaching (cf. Psalm 22:22; Exod. 33:19; Deut. 32:3; Psalm 124:8; Prov. 18:10; Acts 8:12; 26:9). When anything was done ‘in the name of Jesus Christ’ it meant “relying on who Jesus Christ island what He has done” or “based on the authority of Jesus Christ, of whom I am an ambassador” (Acts 16:16-18 cf. Acts 19:13-16).
(iii) Mere exorcism without the experience of salvation through the preached word is worthless and dangerous. A spiritual vacuum exists which opens the victim to worse possession (Luke 11:24-26). Note that the Great Commission is not to heal or to cast out demons, but to make disciples by preaching the gospel (Matt. 28:18-20; Rom. 10:17).
3. What are Christians to do?
(i) We are to preach God’s word, the power (‘dunamis’ from which ‘dynamite’ is derived) of God to salvation (Rom. 1:16). It is through preaching that there is hearing, believing, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 10:14-15, 17). This will prevent people from being possessed by demons. This will also expose those who are already possessed (Luke 10:17, etc.). Note that the Lord confronted the devil with God’s word (Matt. 4).
(ii) When faced with the physical phenomena associated with demonism, remember that it might not be actual demon possession but something induced. Our duty is not to diagnose alleged cases of possession but to confront the victim with the word and earnest prayer.
(iii) All Christian work is to be done in the power of the Spirit. In particular, in places where demonic presence is obvious, being filled with the Holy Spirit is a prerequisite for service (Eph. 5:18). In the sovereignty of God, a Christian who is Spirit-filled may be further filled to meet circumstances where Satan’s activity is particularly strong (Acts 13:9; 4:8).
IV. Concluding remarks.
1. We need to remember that Satan’s main efforts are in the field of beliefs and morals, not in the scattered instances of possession. His clutch on the unregenerate is not dependent on demonism and occultism.
2. It is dangerous to regard Satan and his agents as of little or no consequences. But it is equally dangerous to hold to exaggerated views of Satan’s authority and power. We must daily pray “deliver me from the evil one” (Matt. 6:13).
3. The whole church is involved in the confrontation with Satanic forces. Every member is a local church has his/her part to play in this warfare. Are we sufficiently aware of what we are contending against? Are we fully involved in this warfare?
Questions
1. Christians cannot be possessed but they can be unwittingly used by Satan, as in the cases of David (1 Chron. 21:1 cf. 2 Sam. 24:1) and Peter (Luke 22:31 cf. Luke 4:13). Consider the church today and how Christians may possibly become the unwitting instruments of Satan.
2. What would you say to the argument that although hearings and the casting out of demons do not save, they at least make people more open to the gospel? See Luke 16:31. Should we not say anything against the healing, prophecy etc. of today based on Mark 9:39-40? Cf. Luke 11:23.
3. The Chinese zodiac is used to mark time, i.e. as calendar. It is also used as horoscope to predict a person’s life. It is one thing to say you are born, say, in the year of the pig. It is another to find out your supposed character and destiny based on the year of the pig. Comment.
_________________________________________________________________
2019/2-21: Lifestyle (1 Tim. 6:6-19)
Why we must consider our “lifestyle”:
(i) Our duty to God to do so (Rom. 12:2; 2 Tim. 2:22);
(ii) Our witness to the world depends on it (Matt. 5:13-16).
(iii) We do not want to set a bad example to other believers and be a stumbling block to them (Rom. 14:13; 1 Cor. 8:9);
(iv) There are pressures within the church, and without, for Christians to compromise. The prosperity gospel teaches that God intends to bless believes materially as well as spiritually. Postmodernism (gender equality, pluralism, political correctness in speech, individual rights, etc.) exerts pressure on believes to be tolerant, to loosen on principles, and to accept a more liberal lifestyle.
I. Some relevant biblical principles.
1. Generally speaking, temptations on lifestyle come under the there P’s — pleasures, power, and possessions (Matt. 4:4; 2 Tim. 2:22; 1 John 2:16).
– God gives us all things richly to enjoy (Matt 7:11; 1 Tim. 6:17). Anything right and good can be abused and become sinful.
– It is possible to be rich and to remain godly. e.g. Abraham (Gen. 13:2), Jacob (Gen. 31:1), Job (1:1-3), Solomon (1 Kings 10:7), Joseph of Arimathea (Matt. 27:57), Philemon, who had servants. – The rich are not commanded to to stop being rich ( 1 Tim. 6:17). The Lord did not say it is impossible, but it is difficult, for the rich to enter heaven (Matt. 19:23-24).
– Wealth may rightly be earned or inherited (2Thess. 3:10; Gen. 41:41ff.). Some have the knack (talent) to earn more, who are able to work hard and to work smart.
2. Specifically, wealth and position become a snare when we become covetous and greedy (1 Tim.
6:9-10; Luke 12:15, 16-21; Jer. 6:13). These may draw us away from God (Luke 12:21; Matt.
13:22) and cause us to become arrogant (1 Tim. 6:17). See also Matt. 6:19-21; Prov. 11:28.
– We are to be good stewards of all that has been given to us — time, talents, money, health, opportunities, etc. (Matt. 25:29; Eph. 5:16).
– It is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:35; Eph. 4:28; Prov. 11:24-25).
II. Practical outworking of these principles:
1. Food and drink:
– There is a biblical doctrine of feasting which is different from gluttony. Worship in the OT was laced with feasting. In the NT, the Lord’s Supper followed the “love feast”. The Lord attended a wedding feast at Cana, had a meal with Zacchaeus, had supper with Mary and Martha, etc. Eating together speaks of acceptance and warm, and welcome.
– Many Christians have gone away from the biblical ideal to become gluttonous. We overeat, then go on diet, exercise to get rid of fat, and pay for dieting courses. Meanwhile, two-thirds of the world’s population is underfed.
– What may we do about the situation? Eat in, instead of eating out too often? Invite members home for meals? Be less wasteful in what we buy, and how we prepare and eat our food? Do we need to have meat in every meal? Do we need to eat the “best” rice? How about spending less time looking for, and preparing, food and spending more time in spiritual exercises? While it may not be wrong to drink wine, do we need to drink it so often? What sort of testimony are we giving by enjoying wine so much?
2. Sexual desire:
– Sexual relationship is legitimate only within the marriage relationship (Heb. 13:4). Outside marriage, it is fornication and adultery. God makes sexual relationship for procreation (Gen. 1:28), and for expression of the unique bond between a married couple (Gen. 2:18, 23-24). Sexual relationship between husband and wife is therefore inherent to marriage (Eph. 5:31). There is no need of explicit consent for the sexual act. A married couple should give themselves joyfully to each other, knowing that sex is a wonderful gift from God (1 Cor. 7:4-5). There is no such thing as “marital rape”. Those who are unwilling to have regular sexual relationship with their spouse are not qualified to get married. There is such a thing the crime of “battery”, i.e. physical violence against one’s spouse. No spouse have the right to resort to physical violence for whatever reasons. Disputes between couples should be settled in a biblical way — not by withholding sex as a weapon (Eph. 4:26 1 Cor. 7:5, 10-11). In a Christian couple, marriage is meant to reflect forth the faithful love of Christ for His church (Eph. 5:25, 32). Unfaithfulness in the Christian causes the temple of the Holy Spirit to be defiled (1 Cor. 6:16, 19-20).
– The unbelieving world engages in passionate lust, dissociating the sexual act from the marriage relationship (1 Thess. 4:3-5). Today, it is regarded as a fundamental right — to be enjoyed as long as the individuals consent to it. Couples live together without getting married, same-sex marriage is increasingly legitimised, the LGBT movement has gained ground portraying itself as a legitimate sub-culture.
– A believer may remain single because of any of the three reasons (cf. Matt. 19:12; 1 Cor. 7:34, 39): (i) born sexually-handicapped; (ii) inability to find a suitably life-partner; (iii) personal choice in order to be more free to serve the Lord. If single, do not be in despair, for marriage is still possible in later years of life. God’s grace will be sufficient for you (2 Cor. 12:9). Use your time well to be a blessing to many (1 Cor. 7:34). Be convinced of the teaching of 1 Cor. 6:9-11. This will liberate you from the pressure to give yourselves to those who do not want a life commitment.
3. Beauty and health:
– Modern living is largely sedentary. Even in farming, machinery and automation are used. Coupled with over-eating, many are obese. The young especially are obsessed with health. Time, money and energy are spent on vitamin supplements, health products, sports gear, and membership fees with a gym.
– The desire for health is closely connected with the desire to look good. Ladies who can afford it go for cosmetic facial surgery and breast augmentation, sometimes with disastrous results. Men take up body-building, swallowing ten eggs per day to supplement workouts in the gym. They fail to realise that not many ladies are attracted to one who looks like “the Hulk” or “Desperate Dan”, who walks with the gait of an ape. This is directed at amateurs who have taken up body building without consideration of their build, body-type, and height. They search the internet and attempt to build up their body without realising the harm caused to themselves. We do not want to be misunderstood as being negative towards those who undergo body-building under proper supervision. As a general rule, it is far better to be lean and have well-toned muscles than to be disproportionately top-heavy, with muscles that turn quickly into fat when the physical exercise is not kept up. Bodily exercise is good, if priority is given to the cultivation of godliness (1 Tim. 4:8).
– We are to avoid extremes not only in health but also in looks (1 Pet. 3:3-4). How we dress can reflect our personality and be a good or bad advertisement for our faith. There are those who are slaves of fashion — wearing the miniskirt, then the spaghetti string dress, then the short shorts. There are others who appear to be “children in understanding” on matters of looks (1 Cor. 14:20). There are ladies are “Plain Jane’s” while there young men are “Scruffy Sam’s”.
4. Power and influence:
– Not many hold high positions in society. Those who do are to be God-fearing and seek to use their position responsibly and to God’s glory (1 Cor. 10:31-33).
– Strength of character and trust in God are needed because high positions are accompanied by dangers peculiar to their own. One has to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves (Matt. 10:16).
– Humility and a heart of compassion are also needed. How easy it is to forget oneself and begin to rely on one’s own wisdom and strength. Cf. Saul (1 Sam. 15:17-19), and David (2 Sam. 24:10 cf. 1 Sam. 14:6).
5. Riches and possession: The danger is that covetousness and greed may set in. The more we have the more we want to acquire — land, houses, cars, computers, stocks and shares, etc.
– Covetousness and greed are found not only among the rich also the poor. There is nothing wrong with the desire to earn more in order to live a more comfortable life and be able to do more. There is a proper place for investment and “to use money to make more money”. One has to prepare for children’s education and for old age. It is the love of money that is a root of all kinds of evil ( 1 Tim. 6:10).
– What motives lie behind the continuous and insatiable desire to have more properties, to have better houses, and the latest model of cars and computers? Can such expenses be justified by Christians who “do not have an enduring city here, but are looking for the city that is to come (Heb. 13:14)?” To the not-so-rich, are you living within your means? To the rich, are you flaunting your wealth? Are you living in panelled houses while the house of God remains in ruins (Hag. 1:4, 9)?
6. Work and leisure:
– Work was a pleasure in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 1:26-27), until spoilt by sin (Gen. 3:19). Redeemed people should capture a measure of redemption in the relationship between work and leisure. Leisure is appreciated as a reward for hard work (Gen. 2:2-3; Exod. 20:8-10). In the OT, the holidays (public days off) were holy days (of religious festivals). The Lord and His disciples took time off labour (Mark 6:31; Matt. 14:13). Spiritual refreshment was involved, and not merely physical relaxation.
– Is the size of the pay package more important than job satisfaction? Is taking time off for the annual church camp not as worthwhile as taking the family on holidays elsewhere? Are we setting great store on our annual family holidays while forgetting that many families are unable to have a decent holiday?
III. Some conclusions.
1. Godliness with contentment is great gain (1 Tim. 6:6). We are not to neglect our health, our looks, nor the responsibility to provide for the family, always keeping in view the priority of cultivating godliness and contentment.
2. It is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:35). Giving towards the advancement of God’s kingdom, and the needs of God’s people will result in replenishment of our supply (2 Cor. 9:5-8).
Questions
1. Is there a place for ambition within one’s vocation? When is ambition right and when is it wrong? See Psalm 37:1-7; Prov. 22:29; Luke 14:7-11 cf. Phil. 3:7-11; 1 Tim. 3:1; 6:6-10.
2. What sort of person will you appoint to be an office-bearer in the church as far as lifestyle is concerned?
3. What sort of lifestyle should a pastor/missionary have a lifestyle compared to the people he ministers to? Why?
_________________________________________________________________