“If a man should go about and utter wind and lies, saying, “I will preach to you of wine and strong drink,” he would be the preacher for this people!” (Micah 2:11).

Sadly, people continue to scour the Bible looking for passages to justify the casual and social consumption of intoxicants. Deuteronomy 14:26 is popularly used by Catholics, denominationalists, non-denominationalists and now even by some calling themselves “gospel preachers” as a proof-text for the social, recreational and casual use of alcohol, including both wine and “strong drink.” The context and circumstances of the passage are almost always ignored.

Deuteronomy 14:23-26 says, “And you shall eat before the LORD your God, in the place where He chooses to make His name abide, the tithe of your grain and your new wine and your oil, of the firstborn of your herds and your flocks, that you may learn to fear the LORD your God always. (24) But if the journey is too long for you, so that you are not able to carry the tithe, or if the place where the LORD your God chooses to put His name is too far from you, when the LORD your God has blessed you, (25) then you shall exchange it for money, take the money in your hand, and go to the place which the LORD your God chooses. (26) And you shall spend that money for whatever your heart desires: for oxen or sheep, for wine or similar (“strong” in some versions) drink, for whatever your heart desires; you shall eat there before the LORD your God, and you shall rejoice, you and your household.”

These were Jewish worship instructions. Eventually, Jerusalem was the place where God put His name. Before that, the Tabernacle was set up at Gilgal and Shiloh. Jews would travel there for worship for various special services throughout the year (Lev. 23). Those traveling great distances were authorized to sell goods for money, then use the money to buy what they needed for worship. All that they did was “before the Lord.” As we shall see, the Hebrew word that is translated “strong drink” is actually a generic term that describes a drink that may be either sweet or bitter; either unfermented or fermented; non-intoxicating or intoxicating. The context provides the answer to the question of which it is. People, and especially religious people should not be so quick to assume that Moses is advocating for the consumption of a “strongly” alcoholic beverage. Far too many youths and others are already looking for reasons to consume alcohol. It is foolish and dangerous to misuse a Bible verse in a way that makes them believe that they have scriptural justification for doing so!

A couple of things should be noted about “similar” drink (Heb. shekar) of Deuteronomy 14:26. IF shekar is describing intoxicating drink in this verse, then Moses authorizes the consumption of that intoxicating drink here and it is condemned in other Old Testament passages like Proverbs 20:1 and Isaiah 5:11, 22. This would make Moses contradict himself and would also amount to a contradiction in Scripture. IF shekar is describing intoxicating drink in this verse, then Moses authorized the use of intoxicating drink “before the Lord” at a worship service and condemned its casual and social use elsewhere . These consequences are not viable, for the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35).

The tithe of Deuteronomy 14:23 and the subsequent harvest feast was of newly harvested products. The “wine” of verse 23 is tirosh which is used in the Old Testament only of fresh grape juice and it is only logical that the items used and consumed were from things newly harvested. Verse 26 uses the generic word yayin which is used of both fermented and unfermented wine depending upon context. That this wine was the unfermented wine of freshly squeezed grapes is confirmed by the fact that the travelers of verse 26 would buy their products from the local producers,  that the priests were forbidden to consume alcoholic beverages (Leviticus 10:9-10) and by the fact that no yeast (inherent in fermented products) was to be present during the Passover celebration (Exodus 12:15).

Verse 26 switches to items purchased for food and drink. Of course, food and drink used in the harvest feast still had to meet all food and drink restrictions under the Law (Deuteronomy 14:3-21). This includes prohibitions against the use of alcoholic wine and strong drink (Proverbs 20:1; 31:4-6; Isaiah 5:22; 28:7, 56:12). In every passage where shekar (strong drink) is fermented it is forbidden to drink for casual and social purposes. It is unreasonable to think that the Jews were normally forbidden to drink fermented wine and similar drink but then allowed to do so religiously “unto the Lord” at the harvest tithe and feast! If this passage authorizes the consumption of alcohol then it authorizes its use during a religious service. That notion is absurd. What sense would it make for God to condemn the use of fermented fruit drinks in all other situations except at worship services and feasts?

I wonder how many people realize that by using Deuteronomy 14:26 as a social drinking passage they are actually using a passage that addressed a special religious service of the Jews. Have they not read Galatians 3:10 and 5:3? One obligates himself to keep all tenets of the law of Moses if he seeks justification by that law on any point.

There is another explanation of the text that harmonizes with all other passages where the Hebrew word shekar (strong drink) is used.

Shekar Is A Generic Term

Like the word oinos (wine) in the New Testament and yayin (wine) in the Old Testament, the word shekar (strong drink) in the Old Testament is a generic term. Any of these words can refer to either fermented or unfermented drinks depending upon their contextual use. When oinos and yayin are used of freshly squeezed grape juice it is used of unfermented non-intoxicating drink. When they are used of juices that have fermented they refer to intoxicating drink. The same is true of the word shekar (similar or “strong” drink).

It should be noted that the word “strong” is actually no a part of the meaning of the Hebrew word shekar. Translators include the word because most uses of the word shekar are of a fermented drink. Yayin was a drink made from grapes. Shekar was a drink made from grapes, dates, or honey. Like fresh grape juice or grape juice reconstituted from boiled down grapes (grape syrup), shekar starts out very delicious and sweet. Of course if it is  exposed to air and bacteria (yeast) the sugar converts into alcohol or vinegar and it becomes bitter. Isaiah 24:9 provides and excellent commentary on the word shekar. In describing God’s judgment of the people of the earth Isaiah describes many changed conditions going from comfortable and enjoyable to miserable and sad. One change would be that their shekar which was typically valued for its sweetness would be turned bitter. The verse describes the sadness of their sweet and delicious drink having turned “bitter.” Our English word “sugar” derives from the Hebrew word shekar (and of its cognates). Like Isaiah 24:9, Deuteronomy 14:26 uses the generic term shekar, not of a fermented beverage but of a sweet unfermented beverage that was enjoyable to drink. At a harvest feast the Jews would have used the fresh produce that was readily available to them from the locals. The verse speaks of buying the things that they needed for their worship and sustenance. The yayin was fresh unfermented grape juice and the shekar was a fresh, sweet and unfermented drink made usually from dates and honey. This describes the shekar of Deuteronomy 14:26.

This fact is confirmed by several Bible scholars. In the book, “Wine in the Bible,” Samuele Bacchiocchi cites some examples. Robert Young allows for this explanation when he defines shekar as a “sweet drink that either satiates or intoxicates” (Youngs Analytical Concordance). In its unfermented state it “satiates” or fully satisfies. In its fermented state it “intoxicates.” The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopedia makes this same distinction. Its 2^nd definition of shekar is “date or palm wine in its unfermented state.” This is what the Jews freely drank at their harvest celebration in Deuteronomy 14:26. It would be an absolute contradiction for Moses and other prophets to have consistently condemned the use of shekar at other times and places and then authorize it at special worship gatherings “before the Lord.”

Applying Deuteronomy 14:26 today ignores both the peculiarly Jewish context of the passage and the overall context of Mosaical Law related to the consumption of alcoholic wine and strong drink. While we are encouraged to consider Old Testament examples, principles and definitions, we are not under the Law of Moses today. One cannot establish legal approval of a practice today by citing Old Testament law (Col. 2:14; Eph. 2:14-15; 2 Cor. 3:13-14). People are quick today to cite Deuteronomy 14:26 as modern authority for alcohol consumption but they never cite the food laws of Deuteronomy 14:3-21 as binding today. This is rank hypocrisy. If Deuteronomy 14:26 authorizes the use of a certain type of beverage today, it would only authorize the consumption of unfermented sweet drinks; not the consumption of intoxicating drinks!

Deuteronomy 14:26 has to do with practicing tithes and worshipping at Old Testament appointed places (Shiloh, Jerusalem, see verses 23-26). It is not license to drink alcohol today. It was license for farmers and others who lived great distances from Jerusalem to sell their crops or animals and bring the cash to the place of worship rather than bringing cumbersome quantities of materials to offer to God. Upon arrival at the place of worship they would then buy the things that they needed for sustenance and worship. This included unfermented yayin and shekar. It is sad that my own brethren would so twist and contort such a passage in their foolish but ongoing efforts to justify social drinking of intoxicants. They may be telling people what they want to hear but they are not telling them what God wants them to hear. “If a man should go about and utter wind and lies, saying, “I will preach to you of wine and strong drink,” he would be the preacher for this people!” (Micah 2:11).

—Tim Haile

The Bible addresses both the impeccability and temptability of Christ. The “scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35), so there is perfect harmony between these two doctrines. It is just a matter of collecting the facts and properly defining the terms.

What We Know About Jesus And Sin

God prophesied through Isaiah that Christ would not fail or be discouraged. “He will not fail nor be discouraged till He has established justice in the earth; and the coastlands shall wait for His law” (Isaiah 42:4). All three persons of God are in this verse. God the Father makes the proclamation about God the Son and communicates to Isaiah through God the Holy Spirit. Had Jesus sinned and failed in His mission it would have been an indictment of all three persons of the Godhead. Had Christ failed in His mission so would have the Father and Holy Spirit. Had Christ failed it would have made God a liar, yet “it is impossible for God to lie” (Hebrews 6:18). “God cannot lie” (Titus 3:5). “God is not a man, that He should lie” (Numbers 23:19). Men are “liars” when they contradict God (Romans 3:4). If one claims that God could have been wrong in Isaiah’s prophecy about the infallibility of Christ, one not only denies the deity of Christ, he also denies the deity of the Father and the Holy Spirit.

God is not fallible and Jesus is God. The Bible teaches that God is infallible. That is, He is incapable of sinning or being wrong. Zephaniah said, “The Lord is righteous in her midst, He will do no unrighteousness. Every morning He brings His justice to light; He never fails, but the unjust knows no shame” (emphasis mine, TH, Zephaniah 3:5).  Jesus is GOD (John 1:1; John 14:9; Matthew 1:23; Hebrews 1:3; 1 Timothy 3:16; Colossians 2:9). To say that Jesus could have sinned is to deny the deity of Christ.

God is light and Jesus is light and there can be no sin in God. John wrote, “This is the message which we have heard from Him and declare to you, that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). John provides his own commentary on the terms “light” and “darkness” in this verse and later in verse 8. Light means “truth & righteousness.” Darkness means “sin.” So, in God is no sin. John 8:12 records Jesus saying, “I am the light of men.” John had earlier affirmed this in John 1:4, 5 when he spoke of God the Word (Jesus) coming as a “light” into the world and shining upon the darkness of men. Jesus is included in the “God” of 1 John 1:5 in Whom is no sin. Some agree that Jesus didn’t sin but also claim that He could have sinned. However, this passage goes beyond the hypothetical. It teaches that God’s nature is intrinsically incompatible with sin. Jesus told the disciples in John 8:23, “You are from beneath: I am from above: you are of this world: I am not of this world.”  Christ could not have sinned and retained His nature as God.

We know that satan had nothing in Jesus. He had no hold on Jesus. Jesus said, “I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming, and he has nothing in Me” (John 14:30). The verb “has” is present active and indicative. The indicative mood means whether an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, which means that satan never had any sway or hold on Jesus and never would have. Jesus, is, was, and forever will be, GOD (Hebrews 13:8). This is why Jesus decisively met every temptation with indignant rebuff. Satan had nothing in Him.

The universe would have ended had Jesus sinned. I have been telling people for 40 years that had Jesus sinned we would not be standing here discussing it today. Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-18, “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” The universe would have ended if Jesus had sinned. Had Jesus sinned you and I would have never been born and would not be alive to discuss this issue or any other.

Jesus was foreordained to be the “lamb without blemish and without spot”(sinless) from “before the foundation of the world” (1 Peter 1:19-20). He was “the lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). The absolute impeccability of Christ was the basis upon which He was sent by God to be the Savior of the world. Had Christ sinned, God’s plan to redeem mankind would have failed. The entire Godhead would have failed.

Jesus said near the beginning of His ministry that His meat was to do the will of God and to finish the work. He said that He “always” did the will of His Father (John 4:34; 8:29). He was prophesied to be God’s “righteous servant” in securing salvation for sinners (Isaiah 53:11). Isaiah wrote by inspiration and could not have been wrong in His 700 year old description of Christ.

But there is an even older prophecy of Christ’s sinless perfection. Genesis 3:15 predicted that there would come a time when the seed of woman (Christ, Galatians 4:4) would “crush” the head of Satan. Had Christ sinned this would not have happened and the prophecy would have failed.

Conclusion

We have seen several reasons for believing that Christ could not have sinned. The above passages lead us to conclude that Christ could not have sinned or failed and God still be God. The temptations of Christ (Matt. 4:1-11; 16:1; 22:18; John 8:6) were not to determine whether or not Christ would sin, but to provide us with a perfect example of how to overcome temptation. The temptation of Christ was not some divine fact finding mission or experiment.

The garden prayer was Christ’s request for the Father to help Him physically, which He did (compare Luke 22:43 with Matthew 4:11 — the angel ministered to Him). Jesus then departed from the garden with firm resolve and strength to deal with His arrest, trials, tortures and crucifixion. Jesus had prayed for the cup to “pass” or pass away, not in the sense of avoiding the cross, but in the sense of enduring it and that it would pass quickly. We know that He did not pray to sinfully avoid the cross, for Hebrews 12:2 speaks of Christ enduring the cross for the “joy that was set before Him.” Christ’s mission did involve and require a human body, but His spirit which animated that body was divine (Hebrews 10:5-10). Though his body was born in Bethlehem Ephrathah, His spirit was “of old, even from everlasting” (Micah 5:2).

For my article on the temptation of Christ see: http://www.biblebanner.com/ga_art/deity/tempt.htm

–Tim Haile

Some say that the rejoicing in these passages authorizes clapping at baptisms and this has become a common practice among many different religious people. The clapping is done after a person emerges from the water of baptism. Christians should certainly experience and express joy in response to the restoration of the lost and in the conversion of alien sinners. The question is whether or not clapping is the appropriate and scriptural way to express this joy. A few things need to be considered.

1. Clapping is wrong if it takes the form of applause. Baptism is not a work of human achievement, merit or personal accomplishment.

Not all clapping serves the purpose of applause. A person might clap to the tune of a song. Such clapping amounts to participation in the song and is not intended as applause for the singer or musicians. Some people who clap at baptisms do not intend it as applause. Of course it is worth considering that the hand action and the sound that is produced by clapping hands is precisely the same regardless of the clapper’s intentions. The clapper would certainly not want to leave the impression that he thought of baptism as a work of merit or personal accomplishment that is to be rewarded by applause.

When clapping is done for applause it is done to reward some personal talent or skill that has been demonstrated in a performance or competition. We typically applaud at sporting or other entertainment events to reward those who excel or succeed in their performance. To follow up on an earlier scenario, the one who clapped to the beat of a musical performance at a concert might also then clap in applause to reward a good performance. Baptism is no such activity! Quite the opposite, baptism is an act of humble submission to God. It is not a performance or personal achievement. The apostle Peter described it as an “an appeal to God for a good conscience” (1 Peter 3:21). Paul makes this very clear in Colossians 2:12 when he wrote, “Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” Paul here states that baptism is a divine operation, not a human operation! It is not a performance to be rewarded. It is not an item on a check list.

Many of us have labored for years to refute the false claim that baptism is a work of human merit. Christians are often accused of believing that we “earn” salvation through baptism. We have responded over the years with passages like Colossians 2:12, pointing out that baptism is a divine operation, not a work of human merit. We have pointed out that baptism is simply a condition of salvation, as are faith, repentance and confession (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; Romans 10:10; Acts 8:37). After meeting these conditions one is still saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8; Titus 3:5). Meeting the conditions of God’s grace does not earn the sinner salvation. Rather, by meeting these conditions the sinner demonstrates his dependence upon God for salvation.

When clapping is done for the purpose of applauding baptism it actually strengthens the hands of the false accusers. The applause leaves the impression that we do believe that baptism is a work of human merit and accomplishment! Those practicing clapping for baptism will have a very difficult time explaining themselves to those who accuse them of believing that one earns salvation through baptism.

The expression “be baptized” is in the passive voice in passages like Acts 2:38; 8:36 and 10:47, 48. The passive voice suggests the idea of being acted upon. Though Peter “commanded” baptism (Acts 2:38 and 10:48), the person being baptized is through baptism “appealing to” God’s saving grace and mercy for a clean conscience (1 Peter 3:21 — “Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”) This is precisely the point of Colossians 2:12. By submitting to baptism one exercises his faith in “the operation of God.”  

Clapping to applaud the baptized person for what he has done treats baptism like a game-winning basketball shot or football touchdown. Baptism is not that type of action.

2. Clapping for baptism makes baptism a more important salvational act than other conditions of salvation.

The rejoicing in Luke 15 was over sinners who repented. The lost sheep was one of a hundred sheep but became lost and was then found (Luke 15:4-6). The silver coin was one of ten coins but was lost and then found (Luke 15:8, 9). The lost son was a member of his father’s house but was lost and then restored (Luke 15:13-24).

If clapping is an appropriate form of rejoicing, why do people clap for baptism but not for those who repent and are restored? Luke 15 is obviously dealing with the principle of restoration. Why not also clap for the other conditions of salvation? No condition of salvation is more important than the other conditions. Jesus said, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16). Baptism is meaningless in the absence of belief.

Jesus said, “No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3, 5). Peter said, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). Baptism is meaningless without repentance.

Jesus said, “Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 10:32-33). Paul said, “For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Romans 10:10). Baptism is meaningless without confession.

3. If the word “rejoice” authorizes clapping for baptisms, then do other New Testament uses of the word authorize clapping for other things?

The Greek word that is translated “rejoice” in Luke 15:6 and 9 is also used in other passages. It is used in 1 Corinthians 13:6 where Paul said that the person who acts by love does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but “rejoices in truth.” If the “rejoicing” in Luke 15 authorizes clapping for baptisms, why wouldn’t the “rejoicing” of 1 Corinthians 13:6 authorize clapping for truth teachers and preachers? Should churches be clapping for preachers after sermons? Class teachers after Bible classes? Song leaders after song services? (since songs are a form of teaching, Col. 3:16). Since prayers are to be asked “according to God’s will” (1 Jn. 5:14), does that mean that we should clap for public prayer leaders after prayers?

Where will this end! What about the man who makes remarks in preparation of the observance of the Lord’s Supper? Should we clap for him following his remarks? And what about the partakers themselves? If Luke 15 authorizes clapping for people for obeying the command to be baptized, then what about those who obey the command to observe the Lord’s Supper? Should someone say after the observance of the Lord’s Supper, “How about a round of applause for ourselves for doing what God commanded us to do?”

Paul also used this same Greek word in Philippians 2:17 and 18 when he spoke of his rejoicing with the Philippians and their rejoicing with him. Were they to applaud one another?

Surely we can see that the New Testament word “rejoice” does not mean clapping (and certainly not the clapping of applause!).

Conclusion

The New Testament is silent regarding the practice of clapping at baptisms, restorations or other things. However, we do read of “receiving one another” in the faith and “admonishing one another” (Romans 15:7, 14). We read of extending the “right hand of fellowship” to those with whom we enter fellowship (Galatians 2:9). We read of “comforting one another” with “words” (1 Thessalonians 4:18). We read of exhorting one another (Hebrews 3:13).

John expressed his joy for his brethren in words. He said that he had “no greater joy” than to hear that his children were “walking in truth” (3 John 4). The book of Philippians is known as the book of rejoicing, and how do we know of Paul’s joy and that of his Philippian brethren? Paul spoke it and wrote it and admonished them to continue to rejoice. In fact, he told them to “rejoice in the Lord always” (4:4). Did he intend perpetual clapping?

Joy can also be expressed in the singing of psalms, hymns or spiritual songs (Romans 15:9-11). James said that if anyone is merry, “let him sing psalms” (James 5:13). Singing a psalm, hymn or spiritual song is a very appropriate way of rejoicing with others after a baptism.

The most important lesson is that we avoid the pitfalls of error. Baptism is misunderstood by the vast majority of even “religious” people. Young people need to be taught the true nature and purpose of baptism. It is not a mere “check mark” in the list of things that one must do. It certainly isn’t a work of merit or personal achievement. It is a humble act of contrition and submission.

—Tim Haile

However, king David of old spoke of another “book” of God. This book also contains instructions. Not for spiritual life but for physical life. It is a manual for the development and maintenance of physical life.

Psalm 139 is a psalm about God’s omniscience (thus, omnipresence). The inspired king David acknowledged that God knew his thoughts and his words (vs. 2 & 4). God knew whether David was sitting, standing or lying down (vs. 2 & 3). David then discussed the implications of such “wonderful” divine knowledge. There was no place that he go to escape God’s “presence” (God’s knowledge and awareness of him), not in the earth, sky, remotest seas or in darkness (vs. 7-12). David then discussed his formation in his mother’s womb and observes that God beheld his “substance” even there. In speaking of his own fetal development, David said,

“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth.Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them” (Psalm 139:13-16).

What “book” does David have reference to? Some conflate this passage with Jeremiah 29:11 and say that it is the book of God’s plans for the individual’s life upon the earth. Jeremiah 29:11 says, “For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.” Of course, it is a misapplication of this passage to apply it to individuals today. Most people may not be aware of this, but the verse immediately preceding this one says, “For thus says the LORD: When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place” (Jeremiah 29:10). God was speaking to the house of Judah and His “plan” to return them to Jerusalem after 70 years of Babylonian captivity. He was not speaking of some personal life plan for individuals today.

Furthermore, the “book” of Psalm 139:16 cannot refer to God’s plans for the lives of individuals upon the earth because David was not even speaking of life in general. He was speaking particularly of the “formation” and development of life in the womb. He describes the time when he was “knitted” and “intricately woven” together in his mother’s womb. The writing of God’s “book” is mentioned in connection with his “unformed substance.”  David is speaking of the genetic instructions that are housed in every cell of the human body. He is talking about DNA. These instructions constitute an assembly and maintenance and repair book for all living things. It is God’s book because He designed it.

The “Book” Of Psalm 139:16

The word “book” in Psalm 139:16 is translated from the Hebrew word (çêpher) and is used 188 times in the Old Testament. You can see our word “cipher” in this Hebrew word. The word always suggests intelligent deliberation, intent and purpose. It is used of genealogical records in Genesis 5:1 and Nehemiah 7:5, which involves order. It is often used of the book of the covenant or book of the law of Moses, which expresses a moral and religious code of instructions (Exodus 24:7; Deuteronomy 30:10; Joshua 1:8; 2 Kings 23:21; 2 Chronicles 17:9; 34:31; Nehemiah 8:8). It is used of God’s catalogue of the saved, which list was not recorded on paper but in God’s mind, showing that the book’s information can be contained in different formats (Exodus 32:32; Psalm 69:28). It is used of a written statement of divorcement expressing intent (Deuteronomy 24:1). It is used of various letters that contained plans about how certain things were to be done. We see this in David’s letter to Joab regarding the treatment of Uriah (2 Samuel 11:14), in Jezebel’s letter to the Jewish leaders regarding Naboth (1 Kings 21:8) and in Jeremiah’s letter explaining God’s plans for captive Jews (Jeremiah 29:1, 11). It is used of particular books of the larger book of the law in describing additional actions of various kings, such as the book of Chronicles (1 Kings 14:19, 29; 15:7, 23, 31; 16:5, 14, 20, 27) and the book of Kings (2 Chronicles 16:11; 20:34; 24:27; 25:26; 27:7).

David used this word in Psalm 139:16 in describing the formation of the various parts, organs and tissues of the human body. David didn’t talk about four nucleotides or how their sequencing produces different amino acids for the production of different proteins for different traits and purposes, but he did use the Hebrew word cepher which implies things like order, instructions, plans and actions.

Our cells contain a veritable book of coded instructions. DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the molecule in the nucleus of every cell that contains the genetic information for making new cells. The information in DNA works alongside RNA (ribonucleic acid) in the manufacture of the proteins that determine unique biological traits (such as eye and hair color). These traits are passed along to subsequent generations through the reproductive process. The amount of information contained in DNA is staggering. It has been estimated that one gram of DNA could house 215 petabytes of information. Just one petabyte is a million gigabytes. This capability has led researchers to pursue ways of using DNA as a storage medium.

Using the most advanced technology available at the time, it still took the Human Genome Project 13 years to map the first blueprint of the human genome (1990-2003). Twenty years later, geneticists continue to be fascinated by the function of DNA and the sheer volume of information that it contains. This is because of the possible combinations and repetitions of the base nucleotides in forming proteins. It can take sequences (strings) of as many as 2000 nucleotides to produce one particular protein.

Gene structure wasn’t known until 1953 (though there were earlier suspicions about the concept dating back to the mid 1800s). David could not have known about gene molecules and their unique double helix structure but he knew enough to exclaim that we are “fearfully and wonderfully made.” He was right. A study of genetics is a study of intelligent design.

Psalm 139:16 contains a powerful evidences argument. Job wasn’t a student of gravitational physics, yet he said that the “earth hangs upon nothing” (Job 26:7). Isaiah wasn’t an astronaut, yet he spoke of “the circle of the earth” (Isaiah 40:22). David wasn’t a mariner, yet he spoke of “the paths of the seas” (Psalm 8:8). David wasn’t a geneticist, but he spoke of a book that instructs cells to do certain things in the development and maintenance of life. These men could not have known these things without guidance from a superior intelligence. The Bible affirms that intelligence to be the great architect of all things — God.

—Tim Haile

Wokeness is typically defined as being aware of social injustices, especially racism, and a willingness to oppose these injustices. This opposition includes the censuring of those who say or do anything that violates the “woke” paradigm. In order to be considered woke one must support things like transgenderism (including the right of biological males to compete in women’s sporting events), homosexuality and gay marriage, abortion, man-caused climate change, soft-on-crime (excessive criminal rights), socialism…etc.

Members of the woke movement also speak much of racial equality, but the term “racial equality” does not fit their definition. What they actually support is the preferential treatment of certain minority groups. An example of this is the city of Palm Springs recently approving a universal basic income of $900 per month only for people identifying as “transgender or non-binary.” The policy actually discriminates against “binary” (normal) people but it is not considered “woke” to mention this form of discrimination. Another example is the taking over of the “Black Lives Matter” movement by avowed marxists who call for discrimination and even violence against whites. Every right-thinking person knows that black lives absolutely do matter! However, black lives matter because every human life matters. Bible believers already knew and believed this long before the advent of the “woke” movement. Galatians 3:28 and Acts 17:26 affirm the intrinsic equality of all human beings, regardless of race, color or gender.

A Lesson From Eve About “Wokeness”

The first “woke” human was Eve. She became woke by eating the fruit of the forbidden tree. God placed Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden to “dress it and keep it.” He told them, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:15-17). The devil later tempted Eve by appealing to her sense of wokeness. He told her that she would “not surely die” and that “God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:4-5). Sadly, the devil’s approach was effective. The next two verses say, “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths.”

What Eve awoke to was a new standard of ethics and morality — the standard of herself. She awoke to a new and different moral perspective — her own. Satan had convinced her that eating the forbidden fruit would “open” her eyes to knowing for herself what was “good” from “evil.” He appealed to her pride and convinced her that she would become woke, as it were, and she succumbed to his temptation.

Modern “wokism” is not as modern as some might think. It is the same tired old serpentine doctrine of subjectivism and moral relativism that one reads about in Genesis 3 and it has been repackaged many times throughout the centuries since then. Being “woke” may seem fashionable and cool but it is really just anti-God. The woke person visualizes himself as his own god, which is precisely what satan told Eve she would be. Wokeness is a socially acceptable label for sin acceptance. It may be considered “woke” to accept transgenderism but transgenderism defies the divine design of males and females (Genesis 1:28). It dishonors women to allow biological males to compete against them in sporting events. It is nothing less than cheating and the so-called victories of males against females in these events are illegitimate. This begs the question… how can it be considered “woke” to so mistreat and dishonor women?

It is considered “woke” to praise, encourage and practice homosexuality. However, homosexuality defies the natural and God-given roles of males and females in sexual relations (Romans 1:26-27). The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were very “woke” until God incinerated them for their sin of sodomy (Genesis 19). Abortion is the murder of an innocent human being. Being “woke” does not change the definition of what constitutes human life.

Conclusion

The notion that we can be our own god is a lie of the devil. Good and evil are still defined by God, not by the woke movement. Eve (and Adam and their progeny) learned this the hard way (Genesis 3:15-24). Adam and Even died spiritually as a result of their sin but these verses discuss the physical consequences of their sin. Society suffers as a result of the foolish and dangerous ideas propagated and popularized by such movements. Wokism is destroying many of the cultural foundations of our present society, including the traditional family. And while a crumbling culture is bad, it is not nearly as bad as the spiritual punishment that awaits those who sin against God (Revelation 21:8). It is our hope and prayer that people will experience the wokeness prescribed by God in 1 Corinthians 15:34 (awake to righteousness, and sin not) and that they will meet the soul-saving conditions of God’s grace.

—Tim Haile

Sabbath Observance Was Instituted For Israel

Deuteronomy 5:7-21 records the restating of the Ten Commandments to Israel. This of course included the Sabbath law (verse 12). In Deuteronomy 5:1-3, Moses reminded Israel of their special relationship with God. He said, “Hear oh Israel, the statutes and commandments which I speak in your hearing today, that you may learn them and be careful to observe them. The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive.” Notice the important distinctions:

• Moses addressed “Israel” and no other nation (v. 1).
• He said that the covenant was made “with us” at “Horeb.” Not with their forefathers and not at some other place (vs. 2-3).
• He said that the covenant was made “with those of us who are alive here today” (v. 3).
• Concerning Sabbath-keeping, God said, “It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever, for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed” (Exodus 31:17 — The word translated “forever” means to the end of the age, which means the end of the Jewish age. Jesus foretold of that time in Matthew 23:37-38, pointing to the coming destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD).

These verses plainly teach that Sabbath observance was a Jewish institution. Jesus observed the Sabbath because He was a Jew and He lived under the law of Moses (Luke 4:16).

Sabbath Observance Requires The Observance Of All Other Old Testament Laws

There is no multiple choice option for observing the law of Moses. First century false teachers told the saints of Galatia that they had to be circumcised and keep the law of Moses in order to be saved (see also Acts 15:5). Paul told these saints, “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse, for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them” (Galatians 3:10). He later said, “And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law” (Galatians 5:3). This principle applies to Sabbath-keeping as well. One who practices Sabbath keeping is obligated to keep every other requirement of the law of Moses. Failure to do so results in spiritual condemnation. This would include things like the offering of animal sacrifices, Levitical food and cleanliness laws, a Levitical priesthood, an Aaronic high priesthood, the observance of special annual feast days and trips to Jerusalem, the various tithes required by the law and as Paul discussed, the circumcising of every 8-day old male. And remember that according to Galatians 3:10 and 5:3 there is no “pick-and-choose” option! All would be required. This leads to a huge spiritual problem for people, for Paul also said, “by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified” (Galatians 2:16).

Sabbath Observance Has Been Abrogated Along With The Rest Of The Law Of Moses

All humans today are under the law of Christ, not the law of Moses (1 Corinthians 9:21; see also John 1:17). We are to “fulfill the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2). Jesus personally “fulfilled” the Law of Moses (Matthew 5:17-18), and in so-doing He “took it (the law of Moses) out of the way, nailing it to the Cross” (Colossians 2:14). Just two verses later Paul said, “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath” (Colossians 2:16). That is, don’t let them condemn you for not now practicing these ordinances. They are no longer applicable or binding. In His death Christ “abolished in His flesh the law of commandments contained in ordinances…” (Ephesians 2:15).

The law of Moses had to be removed in order for Christ to even qualify as our high priest. The Hebrew writer said, “For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests” (Hebrews 7:12-14). Jesus came from the tribe of Judah. The law of Moses authorized priests only from the tribe of Levi. In order for Jesus to qualify as our high priest the law of Moses had to be changed.

Sabbath Observance Has Been Replaced With Worship Upon The First Day Of The Week

Jesus rose from the grave upon the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1). He met with His disciples later that same first day of the week (John 20:19) and again upon the first day of the next week (John 20:26). The Holy Spirit came and the church was established upon the first day of the week (Acts 2 — Pentecost was always on the first day of the week, Leviticus 23:15-16). This means that the worship practices mentioned in Acts 2:42 were carried out upon the first day of the week. With the apostle’s approval the disciples at Troas assembled and observed the Lord’s Supper upon “the first day of the week” (Acts 20:7). Giving is to be done upon “the first day of the week” (1 Corinthians 16:2).

Conclusion

Sabbath observance was a Jewish institution during the Mosaic dispensation. We today are in the gospel dispensation. The law of Moses has been replaced with the law of Christ. Even Jews are not under the law of Moses today. All are under law to Christ (whether they like it or not) and will be judged by the gospel law (Romans 2:16; 2 Corinthians 5:10). The New Testament authorizes the first day of each weekas the worship day, not the seventh day. While some acts of worship may be practiced on any or every day of the week (singing, praying, Bible study), the Lord’s Supper and giving are to be done upon the first day of the week.

—Tim Haile

It is called the “Equality Act,” but don’t be fooled by the title. In typical misleading fashion, the title is a misnomer. It is another instance of “calling evil good” (Isaiah 5:20). We are reminded of the expression “pro-choice,” which sounds very noble and patriotic but actually represents baby-killing pro-abortionists who have advocated for the deaths and slaughter of over 60 millions babies.

We usually think of “equality” as a good thing. People should be treated equallyregardless of their gender, color, race or creed. However, this bill is not about equal rights or equal pay. We already have laws governing these areas. This bill actually destroys the great progress that we have made in legitimate areas of difference (such as gender, race or color). The Equality Acts seeks to establish “equality” in areas where things are obviously not equal. For example, it allows a biological male the legal rights of a female by merely claiming to “identify” as a female. He is a man but he thinks of himself as a woman and he wants to be treated like a woman. By no known definition is this “equal.” It is not fair to biological females (women and girls) for men to be given the legal rights of females, such as participation in women’s sports, women’s restrooms, dressing rooms, locker rooms, showers.…etc. This will be very dangerous for young girls. While many so-called “woke” and progressive-minded people might think it cool that a teenage man will be able to shower with teenage girls, I predict that biology will prevail and young girls will be raped. I also predict that the moms and dads of those poor girls won’t think it so cool and cute when this happens.

Science Versus “Gender Identity”

Liberals are great hypocrites. They constantly invoke their god of “science” until it doesn’t tell them what they want to hear. We have seen this for the past year with Covid-19. Science proved that children were at minimal risk from Covid and that schools could be opened. A Swedish study said that only 14 of 100,000 students were hospitalized from Covid and that 4 of those 14 already had serious underlying illnesses. Of course, the liberals who run the teachers’ unions still said no to in-person classes. Science said the same thing about business closures, but power-mad governors and mayors did not care about the science. The same is true on the issue of “gender” and “gender-identity.” Science says one thing and liberals say another. They only use science when it helps to advance their humanistic and socialistic causes.

There is a huge difference between “gender” and gender “identity.” One’s gender is simply what one is biologically. It is a matter of anatomy — it is a matter of science and reality. One is either male (XY chromosomes) or female (XX chromosomes). Just thinking of oneself as the opposite sex does not alter one’s DNA or anatomy. Progressive liberals reject science by saying that males and females are whatever they claim to be, regardless of their anatomy. Gender “identity” is based upon a mere claim, not reality. A biological male does not become a female by merely claiming to be a female. A biological female does not become a male by merely claiming to be a male.

The Bible Versus “Gender Identity”

God made mankind “male and female” (Genesis 1:27; Matthew 19:4). He did not make them “male that identify as female” or “female that identify as male.” Science actually confirms the Bible on gender identity. Males are physically different than females. They have different sex organs. Their hormones and other chemistries are different. These are observable and provable facts. A recent study as to why men are more severely affected by Covid than are women revealed that it was a matter of genetics. Particularly, the role of the Y chromosome in men. A man wishing to minimize the effects of covid upon himself can “identify” as a woman all he wants to but such thinking will not remove his Y chromosome and replace it with another X.

The Bible also assigns different roles to men and women based upon their gender and gender characteristics. Ephesians 5:21-33 discusses the different roles of men and women in marriage (see also 1 Peter 3:1-7). Titus 2:1-6 addresses specific areas relating to men and women. 1 Timothy 2:12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34 place restrictions upon women relating to religious teaching, preaching and leading.

The so-called “Equality Act” will also regulate churches and faith-based organizations. This means that a woman could “identify” as a man and a church would be legally obligated to accept her in church roles that are designated for men only. For example, the roles of elder, deacon, preacher and other religious leadership roles, such as song leader are male roles (1 Timothy 3:2, 11; 2:12). The Equality Act will directly impact a church’s ability to follow God’s law.

The apostle Paul provides us with examples of using legal channels to defend what is right and of opposing civil mistreatment and injustice (Acts 16:35-40). We are within our rights to contact our representatives and senators over such matters. In the sad event that such godless bills become law, we will simply have to say no to their implementation (Acts 5:29).

—Tim Haile

God On Physical Freedom: “Be Not Slaves Of Men”

God certainly wants us to be free from spiritual bondage but He also wants us to be free from physical bondage. Paul said to the Corinthians,

“Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it. For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave. You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men” (1 Corinthians 7:21-23).

There are two important points here. The first is that one should not be concerned if he was converted while a slave. As noted above, one can be a slave and also be a Christian (see also 1 Timothy 6:1-ff). This word “concerned” is used in Luke 10:40 in the sense of concern to the degree of distraction or hindrance. Thus, the slave should not be so obsessed with his social circumstance that he fails to live faithfully as a Christian. However, Paul twice made another point that is equally important. He said that one should be free if he can (v. 21). He then outright commanded, “do not become slaves of men” (v. 23). Many people over the centuries have found themselves helplessly under the control (often godless and abusive control) of other people. Paul’s instruction here is that this condition be avoided if at all possible. One can serve God under the condition of the indenturedtype of slavery that is described in the Law of Moses. However, one cannot serve God and “serve men” at the same time. As Jesus taught in Matthew 6:24, one cannot simultaneously serve “two masters.” As we will see later in the study, the Pharaoh of Moses’ time literally prohibited the Jews from worshipping God. He abused them, stole their labor and killed their baby boys. This was an intolerable and godless form of slavery.

The apostle Peter also had something to say about physical and personal freedom, and quite ironically it is in the context of instructions about compliance with civil law. Peter wrote:

“Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men— as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God” (1 Peter 2:13-16).

We often use this passage to make the point about the role of civil law and our responsibility to obey it. However, we rarely emphasize the first two words of verse 16 — “as free.” Perhaps these words are often glossed over because free people have no real need to focus upon these words. However, they provide context. Given the recent political and cultural developments in our country we may now need to more particularly consider these words.

After instructing readers to “submit” to civil authorities Peter reminded them that this “submission” to government did not constitute subjugation. God did not intend for Christians and others to be enslaved by civil authorities. He does not authorize government to rob us of our God-given liberties. As noted from 1 Corinthians 7:23, we are not to be the “servants of men.” This includes the men who serve in human governments. We are not to be the “servants” of civil government. We are taught to respect and obey God-ordained government but we are not to become its slaves.

According to descriptions found in both Romans 13:1-4 and 1 Peter 2:13-14, God-ordained government is government that performs the God-ordained function of punishing evildoers and praising those who do what is right. Very few governments operate according to this divine mandate so the concept may seem strange to many people. According to the Bible, the scope and purpose of a God-approved civil government is actually a very limited one. Limited government is a biblical concept.

While reading Albert Barnes on 1 Peter 2:16 I noticed these good comments:

“They were not to submit to the chains of slavery; not to allow their consciences to be bound, or their essential liberty to be interfered with; nor in their subjection to the civil magistrate were they ever to regard themselves otherwise than as freemen. As a matter of fact, Christianity has always been the friend and promoter of liberty. Its influence emancipated the slaves throughout the Roman Empire; and all the civil freedom which we enjoy, and which there is in the world, can be traced to the influence of the Christian religion. To spread the gospel in its purity everywhere would be to break every yoke of oppression and bondage, and to make people everywhere free. It is the essential right of every man who is a Christian to be a freeman – to be free to worship God; to read the Bible; to enjoy the avails of his own labor; to train up his children in the way in which he shall deem best; to form his own plans of life, and to pursue his own ends, provided only that he does not interfere with the equal rights of others – and every system which prevents this, whether it be that of civil government, of ecclesiastical law, or of domestic slavery, is contrary to the religion of the Savior.”

The Loss Of Freedom In Our Time: Some Warning Signs

Many of us have grown up so accustomed to freedom that we simply assume that we will always be free. However, history proves that freedom is actually a very rare and precarious thing. Over the course of human history there have been billions of people who have either never experienced freedom or they had it for some period of time and then lost it. Even today in China, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and other countries, hundreds of millions of people live under the oppressive control of communist governments and fascist dictators. Even those in the USA face occasional threats of losing essential freedoms. We are actually witnessing this threat right now as a result of the recent elections which have again empowered political progressives and control freaks who wish to regulate every aspect of our lives. The liberal politician Rahm Emanuel famously said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” Emanuel’s statement made news not because of the novelty of the concept, but because of his brazenness in openly admitting his political strategy. As we shall see later in the study, the “new” Pharaoh of Exodus 1 shared this view about a “crisis” and he used it to enslave the entire Jewish nation. The “crisis” was the drought that impacted Egypt, Canaan and other “countries” over “the face of the earth” (Genesis 41:56-57). This crisis brought Jacob’s household to Egypt in order to obtain food. The new Pharaoh took advantage of their plight and reduced them to slavery. The most recent “crisis” to be exploited by would-be slave masters is the latest corona virus (Covid-19). Many federal, state and local authorities have used this crisis as an opportunity to rob essential liberties from citizens. Governors and mayors have arbitrarily closed businesses, forbidden people to freely worship, restricted travel and made foolish and ineffective mandates. Freedom is very difficult to acquire and maintain and it is very easy to lose. Millions have died for it. Those who have the good fortune of enjoying freedom should never take it for granted.

Freedom is lost when someone or some group of people gain control over other people and exploit them. This is usually done in the form of slavery. Powerful wicked people (including wicked governments) take control of weaker people and force them into service. Enslaved people have no power of self-determination. Their lives are controlled by their masters. Those who refuse to cooperate are typically either propagandized or tortured into compliance.

It may seem strange to those of us who simply wish to live free, but there are always certain people who take great pride and pleasure in controlling other people. They constantly look for opportunities to limit the speech of their detractors and regulate their behavior. As noted above, they often exploit various crises to empower themselves over others. In politics they often masquerade as “liberals” or “progressives” but in actual ideology they are usually socialists and marxists. The cruelest of them idealize power and they seek to acquire it over others by any means necessary. The naive ones have fooled themselves into thinking that they are simply smarter than the average person and that the world would be a much better place if everyone would simply conform to their worldview. Such people are usually not as smart as they think they are and their think-tank philosophies and the restrictions that they would impose upon others are not even workable in the real world. It becomes quite dangerous when mere idealists and theoreticians gain control of our freedoms.

Good laws and good government can protect weak and vulnerable citizens from such foolish and wicked people. It has worked effectively in the past. Wise leaders, legislators and judges support wise and sensible laws and policies. They also block the harmful ones. By “good government” I mean the God-ordained government that I described above. Sadly, socialist progressives sometimes take control of government. Freedoms quickly begin to erode when this happens. Solomon wrote, “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; But when a wicked man rules, the people groan” (Proverbs 29:2). We often think of slave “masters” as being those who obtain control of others by means of brute force. However, the large majority of slave masters have been agents of corrupt governments. They can be found in all countries and cultures.

Some Lessons From Egypt: A Tale Of Two Different Administrations

As I mentioned before, an area-wide drought caused Jacob to send his sons to Egypt for food (Genesis 40-50; Acts 7:11-12). This process resulted in Jacob and his sons reuniting with Joseph. They learned that not only was Joseph not dead, as Jacob had been led to believe, but that he was alive and doing quite well as an administrator in Egypt. Joseph had interpreted Pharaoh’s dreams and was appointed by Pharaoh to manage the seven years of plenty and the seven years of famine. During the first seven years Joseph oversaw the collection and storage of grain in preparation for the the seven years of famine. The drought was in its 2nd year by the time Joseph’s brothers arrived in Egypt (Gen. 45:6).

Genesis 47:13-26 provides details as to how grain was dispensed to needy Egyptians during the seven years of drought. The needy people first used their money. When their money ran out they sold their animals in exchange for grain. When their animals ran out they sold their land and themselves for grain. This was the origin of the 20% flat tax. It should be noticed that Joseph did not forcibly enslave people. He did not force the people to sell their property. He exchanged goods for their property and their voluntary labor. By allowing the people to keep 80% of their produce he allowed them to rebuild their personal wealth.

The book of Genesis ends with Joseph’s death. The book of Exodus opens with a change in administration. A “new” king arose in Egypt who did not know Joseph (Exodus 1:8). One of the ways that this king was “new” was in his attitude towards the Jewish people. The former Pharaoh was kind to Jacob and his household (Genesis 47:7-12). The “new” king was cruel and tyrannical. He took advantage of one past crisis and one imagined crisis to enslave the Jewish people. The past crisis was the natural disaster of a severe drought that brought the Jews to Egypt in the first place. Political leaders often take advantage of natural disasters to amass power and control. The imagined crisis was the fear of the Jews forming alliances with Pharaoh’s enemies and rising up against Egypt militarily. Pharaoh took advantage of the situation and forcibly enslaved the Jewish people. He placed “taskmasters” over them and put them to hard labor. The people lost their land, the fruits of their own labor, their religious freedoms, their freedom of movement and even the lives of their little baby boys (Exodus 1-2). God saw the oppression of His people and sent them a deliverer (Exodus 3).

Freedoms That Are Commonly Lost

Personal Property — We have a God-given right to own property. Peter told Ananias and Sapphira that they had the freedom to own property and they had the right to sell it and use the money as they deemed good and necessary (Acts 5:3-4). Their sin was not in owning or selling property; it was lying about how much they had given to God (v. 3). Early saints had their property “confiscated” (Hebrews 10:34). During Gideon’s time, Midianite and Amalekite raiders regularly destroyed their produce to the point that the Jews were “impoverished” (Judges 6:1-10). Gideon was forced to thresh wheat “in a winepress” in order to hide it from the Midianites (v. 11).

This type of oppression is often practiced by governments in the form of excessive taxation. Paul said that we are to pay taxes, but we need to occasionally be reminded of why we are to pay taxes. Paul told the saints at Rome, “For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending to this very thing” (Romans 13:6). For what “cause?” To what “thing” does government attend? The context plainly answers this. As noted above, God “ordained” the purpose and function of government, and that is to punish evil doers, praise those who do what is right, and provide an atmosphere in which people can “live quiet and peaceful lives in all godliness and reverence” (Romans 13:3-4; 1 Timothy 2:2). This is why we are to pay taxes. We are to pay taxes for the reasons given by God. Taxation beyond this becomes punitive and confiscatory and a violation of God-given liberties. Incidentally, God nowhere authorizes governments to exact taxes for funding things like abortions and sex-change operations.

Fruits of One’s Labor — Slavery is a terrible thing. It is cruel and demeaning and robs one of the fruits of his own labor. God designed work to benefit the worker. Because of his sin, Adam’s work would become more difficult, but even then his labor would still be to his own benefit. It would require sweat but Adam would still eat bread from that sweat (Genesis 3:19). The bread he produced was his own bread. Paul argued that farmers had a right to their own produce (1 Corinthians 9:7). After condemning theft, Paul told the Ephesians to work for their own sustenance and that they might also “have something to give to him who has need” (Ephesians 4:28). These things are possible only if we are able to keep the fruits of our labor, whether in the form of money or in goods. Paul also addressed this principle in 1 Thessalonians 4:11-12; 2 Thessalonians 3:8-12 and 1 Timothy 5:8.

1 Corinthians 16:2 commands us to give to the church (in service to God) as we have prospered. We “prosper” from personal labor, including working “with our hands” buying and selling products, or even investments in the labor of others (Eph. 4:28; James 4:13; Matt. 25:27). We only have these funds to give in support of the works of the Lord’s church if they are not confiscated from us by godless men.

In 2 Corinthians 9:10, Paul argued that meeting one’s personal obligations in working and giving will result in one’s still being able to eat and have an even greater ability to further give (v. 10). [Note that the “gospel-of-health-and-wealth” advocates often exploit and abuse this passage. However, the planting and sowing principle is a matter of natural divine providence. One reaps what he sows (Galatians 6:7). What is true in the natural world is also true in the spiritual world. Paul’s point in 2 Corinthians 9:10 is that what one gives does not reduce or inhibit his his ability to survive and flourish and to give even more.] This cycle of giving and acquiring wealth is possible because of what God designed, both in the way of man, the economy and in nature.

Theft of labor has recently been practiced in a new way. Governments have used the Covid “crisis” as grounds to arbitrarily shut down certain business that it deems non-essential. I say “arbitrarily” because some businesses, such as liquor stores and abortion clinics, were allowed to stay open while others were closed. I have been shocked to see how this has been tolerated. As noted above, work is a personal obligation placed upon us by God. This means that we are free to work. Government mandates do not supersede God’s mandates. Government has no right to arbitrarily close certain businesses.

Slavery (and its modern equivalent of unreasonable and confiscatory taxation) dispirits its victims and it violates the God-given model of economy.

Movement — God told the apostles to “go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15). The apostles did this (Colossians 1:23). The execution of this plan required freedom of movement. Given the determination of their enemies and the general character of the Roman government it is quite remarkable how much freedom of movement first century apostles and Christians had. Of course there were some exceptions (Acts 5:18; 12:4; 16:24; 24:27; 28:30; Philippians 1:7, 13).

Christians are taught to assemble upon the first day of the week in order to observe the Lord’s Supper, sing, pray, study and give (1 Corinthians 11:18-33; 14:15-26; 16:1-2; Acts 20:7). This requires freedom of movement.

Speech — People are quick to cite the US Constitution as proof of our right to free speech. However, God gave us the right of free speech long before the framers wrote the First Amendment. Free speech is coded within our DNA. Like freedom of thought and movement, free speech is an exercise of free agency. We are made free agents by God’s design, after His own likeness (Genesis 1:26-27). Humans naturally aspire to be free. We were made to be free.

First century political authorities told Peter and John and other apostles that they were no longer free to preach the gospel. They did not comply with that order (Acts 4:18-20; 5:28-29). They were threatened, imprisoned and even beaten but they continued to preach the gospel of Christ. God intends for the gospel to have free course throughout the world. Christians are to pray to that end (2 Thessalonians 3:1). In order for that to happen its ministers must be free to speak. Free speech is an essential liberty. We must not allow it to be taken from us.

Religion — Freedom of religion is our greatest freedom. Again, it is not necessary to cite the 1st Amendment in defense of this right. Freedom of religion is a right given by God. We have the freedom to do whatever God teaches us to do. God desires to be worshipped.

Some people make the quibble that worship is not commanded in the New Testament. They ignore the obvious fact that worship is only approved if it is genuine. Worship passages are worded so as to accommodate that fact. For example, John 4:23-24 does not command worship. However it does tell us that the Father “seeks true worshippers” and in order for one to be a “true worshipper” he “must” worship God “in spirit and in truth.” The point is that God is not pleased by people who engage in mere formality and contrivance and have no honest desire to glorify him (Colossians 2:20-23; Matthew 15:7-9). What we do know is that it is sinful to fail or refuse to properly glorify God (Romans 1:21, 32).

True religious freedom is actually a very rare condition. Both history and present circumstances throughout the world demonstrate this fact. Millions of people throughout history have either been forbidden to worship or they have been forced to worship according to the edicts of the state. Tyrants and marxists hate and fear religion because it promotes free thought, free speech and free conduct. It is very hard to control and manipulate people with a Biblical worldview. Even political progressives of our time are terrified by such people. As I mentioned earlier, the Pharaoh of Exodus banned religious worship. Some Roman emperors did the same thing to Christians. Even today, many countries forbid Bible-based worship. Americans may think that it can’t happen to them, but look at how some state governors capitalized on the Covid-19 virus to exert power over churches and worship assemblies! It can indeed happen and it can happen quickly.

Conclusion

Freedom is far more fragile than we might want to believe. Like Peter and John, we must simply say NO when would-be tyrants or governmental officials make policies that infringe upon our essential liberties. The theft of liberties is quite methodical. One unnoticeably disappears, then another one, until finally they are gone and we are at the mercy of our controllers. Sadly, many control freaks gravitate to government because they know that government has the most potential for controlling the most people in the greatest ways.

The Bible tells us to pray for civil authorities (1 Timothy 2:1-2). That prayer should be that governing authorities do their God-ordained job and grant us our God-ordained freedoms. We should also boldly defend and protect our liberties. Paul was quite assertive about his rights as a Roman citizen. After being illegally beaten and imprisoned, Paul was released from a Philippian prison and asked to quietly leave. He refused. He openly condemned their assault upon his liberties and demanded to be publicly escorted out of the prison (Acts 16:36-37). We must be as bold as Paul in defending our liberties.

—Tim Haile

Humans eventually experience grief for one reason or another. Grief is an inevitable fact of life. Most people will actually experience many periods of grief over the course of their lives. The important thing is how we deal with our grief. Sadly, many people allow grief to turn into depression which affects their personal relations with others, including their spouses, children, parents and friends. They become withdrawn and unproductive. Some turn to alcohol or other illicit drugs. Some commit suicide. King David’s servants were reluctant to tell him that his newborn son had died for fear that he might “harm himself” (2 Samuel 12:18). Some people even blame God for the cause of their grief. Prolonged grief can make people bitter and irrational. Grief serves a necessary purpose but failure to control it can have disastrous results.

People should not think it strange that they occasionally encounter periods of grief. Even God grieves over various conditions and we are creatures made in His image (Genesis 1:26-27).

God grieved because of the sinful condition of humanity in the pre-flood era and He even regretted having “made man on the earth” (Genesis 6:6). He later grieved over Israel’s sinful behavior that resulted in the wilderness wandering — “It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways” (Psalm 95:10; Hebrews 3:10). Jesus was grieved over the hardness of men’s hearts (Mark 3:5). He was also put to grief by the cruel treatment of others and by being rejected by His own people (Isaiah 53:3, 10). Jesus “groaned in His spirit” when He saw Mary weeping after the loss of her brother Lazarus. He wept when He saw Lazarus’ tomb (John 11:33, 35). We know that the Holy Spirit is capable of experiencing grief, for we are warned to “grieve not the Holy Spirit of God” (Ephesians 4:30).

Some Causes Of Grief

The death of loved ones is perhaps the most common source of deep grief but before examining that subject let us consider some other sources and reasons:

• Job had “great” grief because of his own physical illness (Job 2:13). Many people experience this type of grief, whether on account of their own serious illness or because of the illness of a loved one. The book of Job proves that ultimately, it is not the words of our friends that can help us the most, but the words of God that are translated into strong faith (Romans 10:17).
• David grieved because of transgressors who refused to keep God’s word and who rose up against God (Psalm 119:158; 139:21). Christians today experience this sorrow. They know what the Bible teaches about the consequences of sin and they want people to take those consequences more seriously. They want them to “do the will” of our Father in Heaven (Matthew 7:21).
• David was also grieved by his own sin (Psalm 31:9, 10). Note that David’s grief was relieved by his own repentance and by God’s forgiving him (Psalm 32:3-5). We today are not under the same spiritual law that David was under, but the principle remains the same under the gospel era — we need to meet God’s conditions of salvation if we wish to free ourselves of the grief of being lost in our sins (Romans 10:17, 9, 10; Acts 2:38).
• Daniel was grieved by the implications of certain of his visions as they related to the future punishment of his people (Daniel 7:15).
• Paul was grieved by the trouble that was being caused by the sayings of a demon-possessed woman (Acts 16:18).
• Corrupt Jewish religious leaders were grieved by the gospel preaching that was done by the apostles (Acts 4:2).
• The godless civil officials, Sanballat and Tobiah, were grieved that Nehemiah had come to restore Jerusalem “for the welfare of the children of Israel” (Nehemiah 2:10).
  [Note: Along with Jacob’s example in Genesis 37:35, these last two examples prove that emotions are not a safe guide. In these cases grief was the result of bias and misinformation. As I will more fully explain later in the article, this is what happens when grief becomes a pretext for blaming God for things that He did not and does not do.]
• Parents are grieved by the foolish and rebellious behavior of their children (Proverbs 17:25).
• Christians experience grief as a result of being persecuted (1 Peter 2:19). Of course, those suffering persecution must remind themselves of the great rewards of faith. Grief turns to joy when we remember that suffering for righteousness sake aligns us with Christ and with others who similarly suffered in His name (1 Peter 4:13, 14; Matthew 5:10-12).

Grief From The Loss Of Loved Ones

The Bible tells us that men are appointed once to die (Hebrews 9:27). Death is an unavoidable “event” that happens to people of all walks of life (Ecclesiastes 9:2). We are constantly reminded of this fact in our daily lives, whether from the news or obituaries or by our personal experiences and observations. Grief comes when one of these deaths was someone close to us — a mother or father, a grandparent, a spouse, a son or daughter or a close friend. The depth and degree of grief is directly related to the closeness of the relationship and thus the degree of personal loss.

Grief is a healthy human emotion. It helps us to empathize with others who have also experienced loss. Solomon said that it is in “the house of mourning” that “the living will lay it to heart” (Ecclesiastes 7:2). Death forces us to ponder the thing that we typically avoid thinking about — death. It is in “the house of mourning” that we contemplate the brevity and frailty of human life. It causes us to take both life and death more seriously.

Solomon also spoke about the healthful benefit of grieving when he said, “by sadness of face the heart is made glad” (Ecclesiastes 7:3). Psychology teaches us that grieving helps people to more quickly recover from the loss of loved ones. Visitations, funerals and subsequent gatherings of family and friends can be helpful in the grieving process. They provide opportunities for grieved people to give and receive emotional support. Interestingly, on such occasions one is likely to see expressions of deep sorrow mixed with expressions of great joy, even laughter. Though these two emotions are very different with regard to the particular feeling that they reflect, they are nonetheless both emotions. We must remind ourselves that different people have different ways of expressing and dealing with grief and we should be as understanding as possible.

Some Helpful Examples

John 11 records the death of Lazarus. After his death, family, friends and acquaintances traveled from Jerusalem to Bethany to “comfort” his sisters, Mary and Martha (v. 19). Jesus also traveled to Bethany and met with both Martha and Mary. He “comforted” Martha with words about the resurrection of the dead (vs. 23-26). Of course, Jesus had something more immediate in mind than what Martha inferred. He would soon raise Lazarus from the dead, long before the finalresurrection. He later met with Mary and “comforted” her (v. 31). We learn that truths from God’s word, visits from friends and expressions of emotional support can help others through their grief in such times of loss.

2 Samuel 11 and 12 tell the story of David’s sin with Bathsheba and against her husband Uriah. Chapter 11 ends with mention of David’s marriage to Bathsheba and of her pregnancy. Chapter 12 records Nathan’s rebuke of David, his subsequent repentance and God’s forgiveness of David. However, David’s sin would result in the physical consequence of the death of his newborn son. Though David had prayed earnestly that the child not die, it died on its 7th day. David did not become angry with God or grow bitter against Him. He did not blame God for the child’s death. Rather, we are told, “Then David arose from the earth and washed and anointed himself and changed his clothes. And he went into the house of the LORD and worshiped. He then went to his own house. And when he asked, they set food before him, and he ate” (2 Samuel 12:20). He had wept and mourned and he knew that it was now time to move forward with his life in service to God and in service to others. His wife needed comforting and he provided that comfort to her (v. 24). She later became pregnant with Solomon. Interestingly, that Solomon was the one who would later pen the words, “There is a time to weep, and a time to laugh; A time to mourn and a time to dance” (Ecclesiastes 3:4). People need to grieve their losses, but they also need to accept those losses at some point and do as David did. They need to move on with their lives.

Acts 9:36-42 tells of the death of Dorcas. Peter eventually raised her from the dead, but before that, we are told that the widows who had gathered there, “showed the coats and garments which Dorcas made while she was with them.” At this memorial service the deceased was acknowledged for her particular skills. People obviously took comfort in that memory of her. Their grief was consoled by being reminded of Dorcas’ good character, her industry, skills and accomplishments while she lived. We are no different today. I have seen this same practice at many funerals. Grievers are definitely comforted by this practice.

Why We Must Not Blame God For Death

Throughout the various miracle ages of the past, God has directly (miraculously) punished certain people with death. We think of Nadab and Abihu in the Old Testament (Leviticus 10:1-2) and Ananias and Sapphira in the New Testament (Acts 5:1-11). Even in those cases the deaths were not God’s fault. The fault was with the people for engaging in death-worthy behavior. God could not be blamed for their deaths.

We today live in the gospel age. Miracles ended upon the confirmation (Mark 16:20; Hebrews 2:4) and final deliverance of the gospel message (1 Corinthians 13:8-10; Jude 3). God is not today miraculously intervening and interacting in people’s lives. God does not cause sociopaths to commit mass murders. God does not cause tsunamis, hurricanes and tornados that kill people. Natural disasters are the “natural” results of millennia-old weather patterns. As Solomon said, “time and chance happen to them all” (Ecclesiastes 9:11). Death sometimes happens as a result of one simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

• Those who die in car crashes die as the result of mechanical or human error (either theirs or of someone else). God does not make people drink and drive or text and drive. People who consume alcohol or other drugs and then operate motor vehicles increase their own chances of dying in a car.
• God does not cause wheel bearings to go out or tires to blow out or deer to walk on highways in front of drivers.
• God does not cause workplace accidents. People choose their occupations. It is a statistical fact that some jobs are more dangerous than others. For example, if one chooses to be a logger, farmer, airplane pilot or roofer he increases his risk of death.
• God does not cause people to engage in risky behavior. People die from mountain climbing, auto racing, ATV riding and from hunting-related accidents. These deaths are the result of personal choices — not divine intervention.
• God does not cause people to contract deadly viruses or cancer or heart disease. Humans became vulnerable to sickness and disease as a physical consequence of being cast out of the garden of Eden (Genesis 3). This subjected mankind to environmental forces that negatively affect the body. As a result of being in this environment, humans are subject DNA copying errors, cell damage and cell replication errors (resulting in cancer), deadly bacterial infections, diabetes, heart disease, viruses…etc. These are not God’s fault.

Conclusion

It is important that we deal with grief when it grips us. I have laid out Bible teaching and examples that show us some things that we can do that will help us through our grief. I have also shown that it is wrong and even sinful to blame God for someone’s death. Rather than blame God, we should actually thank God for the time that we did have with the one that we lost. We should thank Him our own lives and for the lives of our friends and family who remain. We should remind ourselves that we too will one day die and we should “number our days and apply our hearts to wisdom” (Psalm 90:12). We should see ourselves as sojourners on this earth and we should “pass the time of our sojourning here in fear” (1 Peter 1:17).

—Tim Haile

While checking the news this morning I noticed the following headlines:

• 38% of Arkansas church infected with virus in week…
• Priests infected at reopened Texas church…

These article links occupied the top dead center positions on today’s Drudge Report. The link about the Arkansas church was of particular interest to me because I am from Arkansas and because I recalled an earlier incident in which several members of an Arkansas church were infected with the Corona virus. I was about to be shocked that another Arkansas church would have been so devastated by the virus, especially now that we are more familiar with how the virus spreads and what safety measures we can take to avoid its spread.

Guess what? This article isn’t about another case of church-spread Corona virus. It is about the same original case from MARCH 6th! Today is May the 19th — 2 ½ months later!

The prominently placed Drudge headlines would make one think that churches in Arkansas were being literally devastated and wiped out by the Corona virus. They are not. In fact, March 6th is ancient history in Corona virus time. Most Americans knew very little about the virus in early March.

The republishing of articles like these leave the immediate impression that churches are the leading cause of Covid spread. They are not. In fact, a recent study revealed that two-thirds of the cases in New York (the hardest hit state in North America) were people who had sheltered in-place and had not attended worship services at all through the course of the virus spread.

I recently passed by the largest liquor store in Bowling Green and noticed that the parking lot was packed with vehicles. Until overruled by a Federal Judge, our governor (Beshear) had mandated that churches had to be closed but liquor stores could remain open. Common sense and science tell us that Covid-19 cannot know what building it is in, nor can it know the character or spirituality of the people that it might infect. It doesn’t know to attack religious people and leave alcohol drinkers alone. There has never been any scientific reason to believe that Covid-19 spreads more easily in church buildings than it does in liquor stores. Some governors have no doubt discriminated against churches. The law has not been equally applied.

Churches And “Essential Services”

The argument has been made by some governors that churches do not provide an “essential service” so church assemblies should be shut down. After thinking about this a few weeks ago I preached a sermon on the role of churches in shaping character and influencing behavior. The church is “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15). Church assemblies are God’s way of “spurring one another on to love and good works” (Hebrews 10:24-25). Each local church is a self-contained edification society (Ephesians 4:16).

As any Christian will admit, the Bible teaching that they receive at church services is very “essential” in their lives. While one can study the Bible in a number of different formats outside of a church gathering, 1 Corinthians 14:25 shows the power of the positive peer pressure exerted through a local church assembly. Paul describes a church-gathering scenario in which a person is convicted by the truth as it is believed and practiced by the group. This verse describes the church’s vital role in cultivating hearts and instilling conviction. Without this work people are not as informed as they otherwise will be. They are not as patient as they should be. They are not as kind, honest and self-controlled as they might otherwise be. Galatians 5:19-21 lists the “works of the flesh” that will prevent one from inheriting the kingdom. Some of the behaviors mentioned in this list are also physically harmful, either to oneself or to others. Just prior to giving this list Paul described the constant friction between the flesh and the Spirit and the need to be guided and controlled by the instructions of the Spirit (Galatians 5:17). For many of us the Bible is the ultimate standard of conduct and authority. It regulates us and prevents us from behaving in spiritually and physically destructive ways. It keeps us from doing “the things that we wish.”

I was once in a discussion with an atheist who was trying to convince me that there was no God and that the Bible is not true. I warned him that he should proceed very carefully. If he were to some how convince me that there was no God he would have simultaneously convinced me that I could harm him and take everything that he had. I suspect that most irreligious or nonreligious people fail to appreciate how regulated Christians are by their faith.

Churches provide a very essential service when they “speak as the oracles of God” (1 Peter 4:11). Not only are they God’s arrangement for rendering scriptural worship (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 11:17-34; 14:23-26; 16:1-2), they also help Christians think and behave as they should.

—Tim Haile