Right and Wrong

Newspaper Column Articles

PREFACE: the following are a series of articles of mine which were published in the "Right and Wrong" column in the Sacramento Bee, published in Sacramento, California. The Bee is our local major daily newspaper. While I find the political and social reporting execrable, the Religion and Ethics editor is a remarkably fair-minded man, Paul Clegg, something of a model of an editor.

Each week Mr. Clegg poses a religious and/or ethical question to three people, and prints their answers. Some of the respondents are clergy; others are lawyers, dentists, or just opinionated folks. As you will see, I myself have been asked a very wide-ranging variety of questions. Studying and thinking my way to directly-Biblical responses has been a truly profitable — and stretching! — discipline. Further, the word-limit of 150 to 200 words has forced me to try to put the answer succinctly, another good exercise.

What follows are Mr. Clegg's original questions, as posed by him, followed by my unedited responses. (Generally, Mr. Clegg has wielded the editor's shears very mercifully!)

 

Directory of Questions

  1. "Do you think the media should make public the names of juveniles involved in serious crimes?"
  2. "Do you think a college at which students live in dormitories should admit a student who was convicted of killing her mother?"
  3. "What do you think Jesus would say to the singer Madonna?"
  4. "Do you think an alcoholic suffers from a disease or simply lacks willpower?"
  5. "Roberta rented a house to a struggling young couple with two children. The husband has lost his job and they have not paid rent in two months. Roberta fears they will become homeless if she evicts them. She can afford to carry them for a while and thinks that is her moral responsibility. Is it?"
  6. "John learns that a co-worker has been embezzling funds from the company. John tells his division chief, who says it’s better not to make waves. Should John go over his boss’s head?"
  7. "Do you see God affiliated with any political party?"
  8. "Do you think there is one true religion?"
  9. "Do you think the rise of the Promise Keepers movement suggests that many Christian churches have failed to nurture men's roles as husbands and fathers?"
  10. "What is the eighth deadly sin?"
  11. "Where was God during the Jonesboro shooting?"
  12. "What do you think of the quote [sic]: 'Tolerant people are just those who don't believe in anything?'"

The Questions -- and Answers!

November 6, 1995

Question: Do you think the media should make public the names of juveniles involved in serious crimes?

Answer by Pastor [not "Reverend," please] Daniel J. Phillips, Logos Bible Teaching Assembly

It is both a Biblical and an observable fact that we are born inclined to do wrong. Two factors prevent our translating wrong desires into action: a changed heart, or fear of consequences. God commends both: "You must be born anew," Jesus declares. God gives this new heart and life to those believing in Christ as Lord and Savior, creating a desire to please God by doing right.

For others, misdeeds must be restricted by fear of consequences. Paul warns that the ruler does not bear "the sword" for nothing, so we must do right for fear of "wrath."

When God ran a nation, He had laws to prevent career criminals. One was, bluntly, the public execution of incorrigible juveniles embarked on a life of drunkenness and crime (Deuteronomy 21). A twofold benefit resulted: "you shall eliminate the evil from among you, and all Israel shall hear and fear" (v. 21b).

Publishing the names of young criminals could have a like effect, if their punishment were fear-inspiring. However, our court system seems weighted in favor of criminals; few might be sobered by its consequences. Still, the concept is good, and might also motivate some otherwise-lax parents to take their responsibilities more seriously. Do it.

[Back to the directory]

November 6, 1995

Question: Do you think a college at which students live in dormitories should admit a student who was convicted of killing her mother?

Answer: Our society faces such complex issues as a consequence of our defection from God. We do not value human life as God does, nor do we rightly assess human dignity and responsibility.

If we owe the IRS $10,000, we will be required to pay this amount—plus interest! But how to pay for the wrongful taking of another’s life? God deems human life to be priceless. I cannot "pay back" for murder by any amount of money, property, or time served. The only just recompense is the life of the murderer.

But we do not hold murderers fully responsible for their actions. We deny them the dignity that befits human being created in God’s image—a dignity which includes, and demands, personal responsibility.

Murderers can choose from a menu of excuses for their crime. One of the few legitimate reasons is true self-defense, which may or may not apply in this case. This dead woman had been falling-down drunk, and may have been abusive. So when her daughter bludgeoned her to death with at least thirteen blows, stuck a carving knife in her neck, and told the police that her mother had committed suicide, she was only required to "pay back" by a few months in a juvenile home, a three-year probation, and a closed file. Thus, both the victim and the killer may have been denied their God-given dignity, in different ways.

What should a school do? This young lady reportedly lied on her application, and we at least still sometimes frown on lying.

Should the school reason that the young lady has "paid her debt," because she served the court’s sentence? Or should it fear that someone who has learned the cheapness of human life in an insanely Godless American society poses a real threat to the student body?

To that, I have no simple answer. It is up to the university—and to the students’ parents.

[Back to the directory]

January 1, 1996

Question: "What do you think Jesus would say to the singer Madonna?"

Answer: First, the phrasing suggests that Jesus hasn’t spoken to Madonna. He has spoken — to Madonna, and to us all. His words are found in the Bible alone. The issue is: will we listen?

Second, Jesus’ approach to Madonna might depend on her approach to Him. He dealt differently with the young ruler, with old Nicodemus, with Pilate.

I suspect that Jesus might request something to drink. He did so to a similar woman (John 4). Jesus might then point out how deeply "thirsty" Madonna’s lifestyle shows her to be. Jesus would tell of the living water that He alone gives.

Third, Jesus’ message would be, "What does it profit a person to gain the whole world, and yet lose his soul?" (Mark 8:36). Jesus would show Madonna that she — like us — is in sin’s stranglehold, and is under the just wrath of God.

Jesus would point her to Himself, God the Father’s great Gift, who came to fulfill the righteousness we lack, to give His soul through death to pay for others’ sins, and to rise from death to give eternal life in His kingdom.

Jesus would invite Madonna, as He invites us, to repent, and to come to Him for true life.

[Back to the directory]

March 24, 1996

Question: "Do you think an alcoholic suffers from a disease or simply lacks willpower?"

Answer: America’s fixation on the "disease" model exposes our moral rootlessness. The medical establishment once regarded homosexuality as a disease, thus unhealthy. No longer, however, for some theorize genetic predisposition. At the same time and contradictorily, many do regard alcoholism as a disease — for the identical reason: genetic predisposition. The "disease" model, while superficially obviating moral responsibility and creating a "victim," dooms individuals to hopeless enslavement to desires that it deems "natural" and inescapable.

This ambivalence displays the moral cluelessness of our society. God alone can define right and wrong. How I feel about an act, or how natural it is for me, is morally irrelevant.

It may be "natural" for many men to be unfaithful; nonetheless, it is always wrong. It may be "natural" for many women to lie at times; nonetheless, it is always wrong. Why? Because God says so, in His written revelation, the Bible.

We are predisposed to wrongs like lying, cheating, and drunkenness, because we are predisposed to rebel against God. Nor is mere will-power a solution, for the will that wills is still a sinner’s will!

Are we without hope? Not at all. God works miraculously in the hearts of everyone who believes in His Son, Jesus Christ. He imparts a new nature and will. Therefore Paul can declare that drunkards will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:10) — and then add, "Such WERE some of you, BUT you were washed…in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" (6:11).

[Back to the directory]

May 30, 1996

Question: "Roberta rented a house to a struggling young couple with two children. The husband has lost his job and they have not paid rent in two months. Roberta fears they will become homeless if she evicts them. She can afford to carry them for a while and thinks that is her moral responsibility. Is it?"

Answer: This question is not as simple as it may appear. Roberta’s productivity is regularly plundered by politicians who imagine they understand public assistance better than the public. Thus, Roberta has already been robbed at gun-point — in the name of charity. Is this couple making full use of all of the government assistance that Roberta has already been forced to fund?

The Bible forbids subsidizing able-bodied people who are unwilling to work (2 Thessalonians 3:10). It is the young man who is morally obligated — to work! Is he actively seeking employment? Is his wife taking in work at home? Have they no relatives, church, friends?

This fellow is obliged to meet the needs of his own family (1 Timothy 6:8). He must not deprive Roberta of her ability to do the same for hers.

Old Testament law points to a good temporary solution. Land-owners were to allow some of their harvest to remain in the field, so that the needy could reap it (Lev. 19:9, 10). Perhaps Roberta could temporarily accept this man’s labor (painting, remodeling, gardening) in exchange for the rent.

No, Roberta is not morally obligated to allow renters to default on their obligations — any more than are the local gas station, grocer, clothing store, barber, nor book store. But the young man is morally obligated to earn his own living.

[Back to the directory]

July 24, 1996

Question: "John learns that a co-worker has been embezzling funds from the company. John tells his division chief, who says it’s better not to make waves. Should John go over his boss’s head?""

Answer: A Christian must give his best efforts for his boss, working hard and honestly. He is to work as if he were working for the Lord Jesus Himself — because, in fact, he is (see Colossians 3:22-25).

However, when the chain of command is complex, issues are complicated. In this example, one’s immediate supervisor is not fulfilling his responsibilities. What is one to do? Is one’s "master," in Biblical terms, the immediate superior, the CEO, or the company as a whole?

I believe the employee is obliged to see that the problem is resolved for his company’s good. "As to one who knows the good to do, and does not do it — to him it is sin" (James 4:25).

Here is a possible resolution. The employee could notify his division chief that the problem must be addressed. He would be happy if his chief would share the credit for rooting out this egregious problem. If, however, the chief does not resolve the issue by (a set date), the employee will have to report it to the next person up the chain of command, until the problem is resolved.

It would be good to document this report in some way — always assuming, of course, that the employee is absolutely certain that his co-worker is committing embezzlement.

[Back to the directory]

September 13, 1996

Question: "Do you see God affiliated with any political party?"

Answer: Yes, absolutely! God is a Theocrat. His future Kingdom will have no end, with a Ruler unmoved by the fickle moods of the masses. His will be a rod of iron, assuring a kingdom of righteousness (Psalms 2; 72; Isaiah 2).

Further, God’s candidate has already been elected. He is the Messiah Jesus, raised from the dead, bearing a title above every human title, past, present, or future (Phil. 2:9f.).

At present, the best we can do is support whoever most supports God’s values and institutions. The best ruler holds to personal integrity and principle, and keeps his word (Prov. 14:34; 16:12). He knows the difference between marriage and immorality (1 Cor. 6:9, 18; 7:2). He has the moral intelligence to see that the government must protect innocent life, particularly "little guys" — all children, loved or unloved, "normal" or handicapped, rich or poor, convenient or inconvenient, born or unborn (Prov. 31:8, 9). He cares intelligently enough about the poor to "promote the general welfare" by letting the productive enjoy the fruits of their labor, thus creating jobs and fueling the general economy (1 Pet. 2:14b).

He would appoint judges who will enforce the law swiftly and with justice (Eccl. 8:11), favoring neither rich nor poor (Lev. 19:15).

Above all, he would know the difference between the true God and himself, or the State (Dan. 4).

A wise voter chooses the candidate who will best advance society in this direction.

[Back to the directory]

May 20, 1997

Question: Do you think there is one true religion?

Answer: If "religion" means a manmade system for attaining God, the answer is "no." There have been millions of such "religions"; due to man’s hopeless self-delusion, every one of them is false.

However, if "religion" means God’s own revelation of Himself, the answer is necessarily "yes." God cannot lie, and is Himself the quintessence of logic. Hence, His self-revelation is necessarily one, and necessarily excludes all contraries.

Put infinitely better, "God, having spoken of old in many portions and in many ways to the fathers in the prophets, at the last of these days has spoken to us in the Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the ages" (Hebrews 1:1, 2). Thus, the Old Testament contains God’s self-revelation in words, deeds, and symbols. The New Testament embodies His consummate self-revelation in Jesus, who said "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father if not through Me" (John 14:6). Jesus’ claim is confirmed by a documented, miraculous life of fulfilled prophecy, culminating in His bodily resurrection from the dead.

There are "religions," and they are all false; and then there is Jesus, and He is the Truth.

[Back to the directory]

November 8, 1997

Question: Do you think the rise of the Promise Keepers movement suggests that many Christian churches have failed to nurture men's roles as husbands and fathers?

Answer: To be blunt, I find it difficult to think of any significant area in which Christendom (loosely termed) is not failing miserably.

God's charge to His church is that it enlist students of Christ, internationally. This is to be done by our proclaiming the person and work of Jesus, and by teaching the entire Word of God — hot, straight, and without compromise or apology (Matt. 28:18f.; Col. 1:27; 2 Tim. 4:2).

Yet, in their pathetic yearning to be well-liked by God's enemies, churches strive for popularity, literally at any cost. Entertainment rules. The professing church of Jesus Christ — its collar besmeared with the cheap lipstick of false paramours Feminism, Mysticism, Relativism, Universalism, and Emotionalism — is unworthy of the name.

So yes, almost every parachurch organization marks a failure. Yes, the church has failed to instruct and urge men to embrace God's designed rôle for them — as surely it timidly refuses to instruct and urge women to embrace God's distinctive rôle for them.

The final answer is not PK, whatever its strengths. No, it is massive, nationwide repentance by professing Christians, coupled with unconditional insistence that pastors teach nothing less — and nothing else — than the whole Word of God.

[Back to the directory]

December, 1996

Question: What is the eighth deadly sin?

Answer: This myth of "seven deadly sins" was born in the Dark Ages, before the Reformers reclaimed the truth of learning of God "by Scripture alone." It contributes to our modern practice: singling out something one finds both heinous and unappealing (intolerance, pollution, child abuse), labeling that as a "deadly sin" — and thus feeling oneself to be shiningly moral by contrast.

What is "sin"? Sin is lawlessness (1 John 3:4), active or passive rebellion against the Law of the King revealed in Scripture. How much rebellion is tolerable? How much does it take before one has committed a capital offense?

In this universe, created and ruled by a perfectly righteous God, no rebellion is tolerable. Sin's wages are unchanging: physical death (Genesis 3-5), spiritual death (Romans 6:23), and eternal death under the burning wrath of God in Hell (Matthew 25:46, Revelation 20:14). Uncongenial as the concept may appear in our poll-crazed day, one sin in God's eyes constitutes a person as a lawbreaker (James 2:10). Any sin and all sin is "deadly." Judged by God's standard, we are all doomed.

Unless there is a Savior.

And that — not Santa, Frosty, nor Rudolph —is what Christmas is really all about.

[Back to the directory]

April, 1998

Question: A parent of one of the children surviving the Jonesboro shooting said that God had held the child close. Why did God not hold the children who were shot and killed? [I lost the question, oddly, and this is a from-memory version of it.]

Answer: A child's death, despite our abortion-culture mentality, still looms as an "unthinkable thought." What involvement can God have with such monstrous acts as those of the young murderers in Arkansas?

The truth is that the living God is sovereign over all events. Jesus called Him "Lord of heaven and earth" (Luke 10:21). Suffering Job confessed that we must receive not only good, but misfortune, from His hand (Job 2:10).

God's perspective is that of eternity. When He contemplates such an evil human act, He also contemplates His own ultimate and final judgment on it. He does not experience our tension of living in the horrible gap between an injustice and its resolution. The immoral and irrational seem to "get away with" their evils; but "God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil" (Ecclesiastes 12:14).

Did God hold the children who survived? Yes; but He no less held those who died (Job 12:10). We are horrified, rightly, that they died so young. Yet we shall all die, "young" or "old." Have we made peace with God on His terms, though Jesus Christ, so that our deaths need hold no terrors for us?

[Back to the directory]

June, 1998

Question: What do you think of the quote [sic]: "Tolerant people are just those who don't believe in anything?"

Answer: It depends. Some "tolerant" people simply know the difference between central and peripheral issues, and get along well with those who differ on the latter. Any free society requires such "tolerance" at minimum.

Others, however, cloak a very narrow ideology in "tolerance." They pride themselves in being very tolerant indeed — of people who agree with them. But let someone break from the accepted orthodoxy, and the soapy "tolerance"-bubble bursts. This "tolerant" crowd has no tolerance for one (say) who has the moral sense to distinguish between "choice" and butchering inconvenient children, or between God's institution of marriage and various perversions of His gift, or between generosity (enjoined by the Bible) and government-sponsored covetousness, theft and redistribution (forbidden by the same).

I have discovered that today's "tolerant" crowd is least tolerant of the person who has reasoned convictions based on God's revelation in the Bible and in Jesus Christ. That person poses the sharpest threat to the amorphous, gelatinous, invertebrate lawlessness which passes for "tolerance" today — and for him there can be no tolerance.

[Back to the directory]

Copyright © 1998 by Daniel J. Phillips; All Rights Reserved


Return to Biblical Christianity Home Page