Tag Archives: worldliness

Social Vices

Literature, , , , ,

by David E. Moss

Even light reading of the Bible reveals that God makes a distinction between things that are right and wrong, good and evil, holy and unholy, clean and unclean. God also makes it clear in His Word that His people are supposed to demonstrate this difference in their lives.

To the church God said,

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? For ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you (II Corinthians 6:14-17).

To the Priests of the Old Testament God said,

And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between clean and unclean; And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the LORD hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses (Leviticus 10:10-11).

To the Priesthood of believers in the New Testament God said,

Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation, Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy (I Peter 1:13-16).

Some suggest, however, that the Bible teaches a moral relativism. They object to the practice by which one Christian makes a list of specific activities for another Christian which he considers to be either right or wrong. A statement in a publication by a prominent evangelical seminary says:

A closer reading and study of God’s Word now indicate that “separation” as proclaimed and practiced by Christians committed to that stance is neither biblical nor Christlike. It distorts the message of holy living by grace and resorts to legalism. Like the Judaizers who overran the First Church of Galatia, such separationists have instituted their own taxonomy of extra biblical standards. As if to compensate for the presumably insufficient work of Jesus Christ in achieving man’s redemption, believers are urged to add works of their own: circumcision in the form of a checklist of disallowed entertainments and cultural taboos… Instead of asceticism and deprivation, instead of isolationism and withdrawal from the world, thinking Christians need to reassert their calling to live in “sanctified worldliness,” that is, to live fully and freely as children of God in appreciation of the world He has given them to care for… For to lead the church of Jesus Christ at the end of the 20th century into fuller understanding of its redemptive mission in the world, people need the example of thinking Christians living in sanctified worldliness — Christians who know and appreciate nature, who know and love the arts, who know and enjoy recreation and entertainment…

According to this statement, we have finally come to understand the Bible after 20 centuries. No one before our generation looked at the Scriptures closely enough to understand that God really wants us fully and freely to indulge in the pleasurable things this world has to offer, and that anyone who suggests that God wants us to deprive ourselves and to isolate ourselves from the entertaining things of this world is a legalist.

Both church history and the Bible refute this new version of Christian libertarianism. Throughout church history, specific applications of biblical guidelines for moral behavior have been preached and enforced by church leaders. Those guidelines are still a part of the inerrant, infallible, indestructible Word of God. The specific applications may vary according to a man’s culture, but the need for those applications will be exactly the same, regardless of time or place.

A History of How the Church Has Dealt With Social Vices

Once the church was established in the first century and specific leadership began to emerge in each local church, those early leaders quickly sensed a need for monitoring the testimony of the church in the community. The world of the Roman Empire was morally depraved. Prostitution was considered a viable career option and young girls could go to school to train to be prostitutes. Abortion and infanticide were common place. Art was dominated by nudity and obscenity and was displayed in the most public of places. The upper classes were saturated with a lifestyle of sensuality, and the Emperors themselves were as guilty of excessive behavior as anyone else. Divorce and remarriage was normal, homosexuality was practiced freely, and public entertainment was full of violent and licentious performances.

In this context, the church Fathers tried desperately to help Christians make specific applications of biblical principles regarding social behavior. They denounced abortion, infanticide, divorce, homosexuality, prostitution, adultery, make-up, dyed hair, and drunkenness. They restricted the use of musical instruments in worship to avoid the sensual overtones with which such sounds were associated in the world. They set rules against Christians attending the theater and the public games in the arenas. They preached against participation by Christians in the festivities of pagan holidays. One example of the specificity with which these early church Fathers instructed the believers regards the “holy kiss” suggested by Scripture (II Corinthians 13:12) and practiced in those early local churches. The historian Will Durant describes these instructions as follows:

In some congregations this was given only by men to men, and by women to women; in others this hard restriction was not enforced. Many participants discovered an untheological delight in the pleasant ceremony; and Tertullian and others denounced it as having led to sexual indulgences. The Church recommended that the lips should not be opened in kissing, and that the kiss should not be repeated if it gave pleasure. (Caesar And Christ, page 598)

The excesses of Roman licentiousness were so difficult for the church to counteract, that some came to believe extreme measures were necessary in order to succeed. Blatant displays of the lusts of the flesh throughout society led some to ascetic practices and extreme behaviors in which they sought to remove from themselves any semblance of worldliness. Out of this grew monasticism, a practice in which men removed themselves completely from society and in isolation sought to live holy, pure, and spiritual lives. There are many critical things one might say about monasticism, but it does illustrate an awareness by early Christians of how dangerous it was to expose oneself to the temptations of a depraved society.

The struggle continued throughout church history. There were times in which some church leaders gave in to the passions of the flesh and others had to pull the church back into moral reality. For example, the Popes and priests of the Dark Ages, who were supposed to live celibate lives, kept concubines and celebrated the weddings of their own illegitimate children. Part of the Reformation reaction to the excesses of Catholicism was a moral outrage at how corrupt these church leaders had become. Reformation preaching brought about a renewal of moral codes of conduct, restoring the values of marriage, family and social responsibility to the people who called themselves Christians.

By the 19th century, the church in America had influenced society so thoroughly that the conservative moral and social standards preached in the pulpit became the accepted standard for life outside of the church. The Christian lifestyle was the pattern and secular society adapted its social mores to conform. It is no coincidence then that the proponents of liberalism attacked the church first. The credibility of Scripture was undermined by biblical criticism; man’s accountability to God was brought into question by Darwin’s theories of evolution; and the rules for Christian conduct were contradicted by “thinking” liberal theologians and religious philosophers. As a result, the prestige of the church was diminished in the eyes of the general population who then looked elsewhere for their values. Eventually, the direction of influence was completely reversed and the mores of the church became the product of a hedonistic society.

When I was a teenager in the 1960’s, the world was promoting free love, short skirts on girls, long hair on boys, and rock ‘n’ roll music. In the church, it was very different. Christians did not dance, attend the movie theater, drink alcohol, smoke, or have sex outside of marriage. Girls were not allowed to wear short skirts, boys were not allowed to have long hair and, and rock ‘n’ roll music was taboo. At least, this was what I was taught, but not everyone in the church agreed. When the Beatles appeared on the Ed Sullivan Show for the first time, many in the church were outraged at the blatant display of rebellion in their music and physical appearance. But many Christian teenagers stayed home from the Sunday evening service to watch the show. A generation later, the Beatles now appear to be mild compared to the kind of music and dress used for “worship” in many churches across America. Need we wonder why? The Christian teens who chose the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show over Sunday evening service are now the leaders of the local church.

A Specific History of How North Hills Bible Church Has Dealt With Social Vices

Back in the 1930’s, the founding Pastor of the North Hills Bible Church faced the same struggle in trying to keep worldliness out of the church. Quoting from a history of this local church,

Rev. Kraybill felt the need to preach the gospel as the Holy Spirit led. But in the process he was tramping on certain persons toes… The local church did not mind the preaching of eternal security, in fact they were in favor of it, but they were not all in favor of the way he preached on a separated Christian life. This seemed to be a continual hardship for many people as they lived in their worldly ways. The issue was finally decided when the daughter of one member of the church wanted to go into show business and the family was in favor of it. Rev. Kraybill protested violently and asked to have this family put out of the church.

This controversy resulted in a protest being registered with the leadership of the denomination to which the church belonged. The denomination withdrew Pastor Kraybill’s ordination credentials and removed him from the pulpit. The good news is that a large part of the congregation appreciated Pastor Kraybill’s stand on doctrine and morality and joined with him in starting The Bible Church.

Some years later, under the guidance of another Pastor (James McClain) North Hills Bible Church continued its stand on social issues by adopting a dress code. In minutes from the church board meeting dated March 18, 1973,

The matter of standards for the young people was brought up. Some of the girls wear their skirts entirely too short. Standards need to be set down for church and churchrelated young peoples’ activities.

One of the board members at that time said

That the same needs to be done for Sunday School teachers. The discussion brought out that this is indeed an area we need to give attention to and be concerned about.

Another board member brought forth a similar problem, saying,

Members of the congregation have complained about the skirts of some choir members… They request that the board take definite and immediate action on this matter before it gets completely out of hand. The Board discussed the standards to be set and the business of enforcing the standards. The Pastor suggested that he and the secretary (of the Board) draw up a set of standards… The board noted that Christian liberty stops where one sets a bad example for others.

Several months later, the Pastor read the code of dress standards to the board. The minutes of September 9, 1973 read,

There was considerable discussion, centering about the matters of whether the code should read “should” or “must” on requiring standards; the issues involved; and how to put it into effect. Christians should know what is right without such a step, and children from Christian homes should be instructed on such things. But they are not. People know what the church stands for, but are influenced in worldly directions… It was decided that the forum for presenting this to the congregation was via a series of messages on separation. The Pastor feels the churches are losing their identification as peculiar people; there is a lack of separation. We should put the burden of responsibility on the girls and women to do what the Bible teaches. In the end it was decided to make the code say “must” rather than “should,” and the skirt length to be defined as “knee length” rather than a number of inches.

The following is the resulting Dress Code for North Hills Bible Church as included in the minutes of the Board, December 9, 1973:

The Word of God is very clear about the dress and conduct of believers in Christ. We are “a peculiar people” (I Peter 2:9) and as such we are to abstain from all appearance of evil. (I Thess. 5:22) Since the fashions of men completely ignore, in many instances, all decency and modesty, it is necessary to spell out what the believer in Christ must do to retain his testimony for and obedience to Christ. We feel that the Lord is not pleased when women and girls adopt apparel that exposes their bodies and in anyway makes them be the cause of exciting lust in the opposite sex (I Timothy 2:9).

In view of this, dresses and skirts must not be shorter than knee length and the neck line not be of exaggerated plunging style. Hip-huggers and bare midsections are highly immodest. Men’s hair must be neatly trimmed and kept so as not to identify or associate them with the godless revolutionary symbols of the day. Likewise, men’s apparel must be modest – not gaudy, wild and spectacular. The believer should not be proud and vain seeking to draw admiration and attention to himself, but rather be inconspicuous so that people’s attention will be focused on the Lord Jesus Christ.

Many Christians innocently and without any thought of joining Satan’s crowd are tricked into wearing the fashions of the day, because everybody is doing it. Let us not join the enemies of our Lord by conforming to the ways of this present evil world.

We desire our young people to recognize the moral issues involved in dress standards, and to develop attitudes of modesty and decency in line with the Word of God. We encourage them to recognize that prescribed limitations are necessary and not arbitrary or legalistic. Therefore, these standards of dress are affirmed as applicable to them in their various activities.

This specific example from North Hills Bible Church illustrates the attempt by Christian leaders in every period of church history to help God’s people understand how to apply the biblical principles of morality in specific social situations. Legalism was the furtherest thing from their minds. Sanctification and the pursuit of holiness according to the commandments of Scripture was always their sole objective.

Biblical Guidelines for Sanctification

Nevertheless, we are confronted with the argument that the closer reading and study of God’s Word available to us today proves that church leaders from Tertullian to Martin Luther to O.M. Kraybill to James McClain have been legalistic in establishing specific codes of conduct for the members of their churches. There is, however, another way to look at this. There has been a profound consistency among godly men throughout church history in making specific applications of biblical principles in social contexts. And from this consistent example of godly men, it really appears that today’s Christian libertarians are grossly missing the point.

The setting of rules which help believers understand specific applications to biblical principles of sanctification is not legalism. Legalism is the philosophy by which one attempts to earn spiritual favor from God, particularly for salvation, by his own works. To institute a set of standards for Christian conduct in the form of a checklist of disallowed entertainments and cultural taboos which provide believers with helpful insights as to the difference between that which is clean and unclean is surely not legalism in the biblical sense. If it were, then God himself is a legalist. The Bible is full of lists which outline the difference between right behaviors and wrong ones. For example, Galatians 5:19-23 lists the difference between the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. II Thessalonians 3:6-15 describes the errors and consequences of disorderly conduct among believers. I Timothy 5:11-15 admonishes young widows concerning inappropriate behavior for Christian women. II Timothy 3:1-7 lists the characteristics of those who have a form of powerless godliness and who perpetually pursue knowledge without ever reaching truthful conclusions. I Peter 4:3-5 warns against returning to the activities characteristic of an unsaved lifestyle.

The first century church struggled with this matter of legalism, in which some insisted that Gentiles were required to follow certain Jewish regulations in order to be a Christian. Those godly Apostles and first Elders, while dismissing legalism as false and unscriptural, made a short list of taboo activities. They said:

Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men… who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.

This list is particularly interesting in that it includes the activity of abstaining from meats offered to idols. To these men, this was not an optional activity reserved for mature believers. They simply said that Christians would do well to abstain. This gives a whole different perspective on what Paul was teaching in I Corinthians 8 and 10 concerning this activity. The admonitions in these chapters to those who were eating meat offered to idols indicate that there were some serious questions about the propriety of their doing so, even if it did not immediately affect their own personal persuasion in the faith.

Christian libertarians, though, like to use eating meat offered to idols as an example of a gray area in which believers have options and absolute rules for behavior are inappropriate. The term “gray area” is supposed to suggest that an activity so labeled cannot possibly be defined as either right or wrong and that anyone who makes rules against gray area activities is legalistic. The color gray, however, is a mixture of black and white. In fact, it is the presence of black in the color gray which has taken away the purity of what was originally white. How can a sanctified believer justify indulging in an activity that has been compromised by such a mixture? The Bible says we are even to abstain from all appearances of evil (I Thessalonians 5:22). If something has enough darkness in it to call it gray, surely the appearance of evil cannot be far away.

God made it very clear in His word that believers, enabled by grace, are to live sanctified lives.

For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: that every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour (I Thessalonians 4:3-4).

The emphasis on the word vessel means that a believer must on the one hand deny himself certain worldly entertainments and cultural activities which foster the flesh and encourage carnality in the believer’s life; and on the other hand, he must pursue godliness by carefully selecting behaviors that show in the exterior of his life the sanctification of the inner man being wrought by the Spirit of God. Titus 2:11-12 tells us that the very same grace of God that brings salvation to men also teaches us, that denying ungodliness, and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world. Repeatedly, God’s Word tells us that believers are to adopt a lifestyle of non-conformity to the world in order to live a sanctified life (Romans 12:1-2, Romans 8:13, Romans 13:13-14, II Corinthians 7:1, Galatians 5:16, II Timothy 2:22, I Peter 2:11, I Peter 4:3-5, I John 2:15-17).

II Corinthians 6:14-18 explains how believers are to separate from the world and touch not the unclean thing so that our fellowship with God will not be broken. What is the unclean thing that believers are not to touch? This is the monumental question Christian leaders have been trying to help believers grapple with for two thousand years. First, it is important to note that there is such a thing as an unclean thing from which believers are to keep themselves. And, in order to do this, we must identify what that unclean thing is. Secondly, the Greek text does not include the definite article with the phrase unclean thing. The Bible is thus not referring to one specific thing that is unclean, but to anything that is unclean. Whatever is characterized by being unclean, that is what the believer should not touch. So the believer is left with the important exercise of evaluating everything that is available to him in this world and determining whether or not it is clean and therefore compatible with the sanctified life he is to be living in Christ.

The lists provided by separationists serve as sources of advice in determining what is clean and what is unclean. Mature believers who provide such lists in no way suggest that a person can get to heaven by meticulously following their so-called “man-made” rules. Rather, they are providing insight based on their knowledge and experience to growing Christians as to the kind of activities which have the potential of preventing them from possessing their vessel in sanctification and honor. This is precisely what the Apostles and Elders were doing when they told the Gentile believers to abstain from meats offered to idols. This was what the church fathers were doing when they instructed Christians not to attend the theater. And, this was what the Board was doing when it provided a dress code to the congregation of the North Hills Bible Church.

The burden of proof is not on the separationists to confirm that their lists are not legalistic. The burden of proof is on the libertarians to confirm that their lack of restraint is not an occasion to the flesh. In Galatians 5:13, Paul called for perspective in reacting to legalism by saying, For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. The liberty to which we have been called in Christ is not one of indulgence but one of service. Being liberated from sin and all of its consequences, we should not turn again to the self-pleasuring activities associated with the problem, but we should turn instead to the respectable activities that help others find the solution.

Laying this burden of proof on the libertarian’s shoulders, let them answer the following questions.

  1. Does dancing avoid the immoral pitfalls represented in Scripture when Herod derived destructive pleasure from watching his stepdaughter perform before him and his guests? (Matthew 14:1-12)
  2. Does dancing avoid the pitfalls which resulted from the questionable public demonstration of David, albeit in the context of worship, who by it breached his relationship with his first and most legitimate wife? (II Samuel 6:20-23)
  3. Does attending the public movie theater conform with the Scriptural command to come out from among them and be ye separate… and touch not the unclean thing? (II Corinthians 6:17)
  4. Does indiscriminate watching of movies, videos, or television programs which contain violence, sexual content, and other elements of ungodliness fulfill the Scriptural principle stated in Psalm 101:3: I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me?
  5. Does the wearing of mini-skirts, short shorts and other types of clothing that expose more flesh in public comply with God’s instruction to dress modestly? (I Timothy 2:9).
  6. Does changing our wardrobe and conforming to every fashionable fad fulfill the biblical rule not to conform to this world? (Romans 12:1-2)
  7. Do long hair styles on boys which mimic rock ‘n’ roll singers follow the teachings of nature and of the Word of God showing a man’s proper position in the order of creation? (I Corinthians 11:1-15)
  8. Does the incorporation of the elements of worldly music into Christian music actually help a believer to walk in the Spirit and not to fulfill the lusts of the flesh? (Galatians 5:16)
  9. Does participation in worldly forms of entertainment fulfill the Scriptural admonition to let the time past of our life …suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles? (I Peter 4:3)
  10. Is a Christian’s acceptance of activities as neutral merely because they are culturally derived compatible with God’s warning to love not the world, neither the things that are in the world? (I John 2:15)

Final Note

There is a very disturbing statement in Will Durant’s commentary on the infiltration of worldly practices into the early church. He said, “In such matters it was not the priests who corrupted the people, but the people who persuaded the priests” (The Age of Faith, page 75). In other words, the church was turned upside down. Those who should have been leading were following; and those who did not know where they were going were determining the direction the church would take. It has not always been this way in the church, but the pendulum is swinging back in this direction in our day.

Christians have a very significant choice to make: will they let the teachings of the church be the dominant influence on how they live their lives in the world; or will they let the influence of the world be the dominant factor in what they look for from their church? For too many, the latter is the choice they make. They see things they enjoy in the world and they insist that the church provide the same kinds of opportunities for self gratification.

This then forces church leaders to make a choice: will they stand firm and say no, or will they give in and accommodate the worldly desires of people in the pew? Let’s face it. A pastor’s livelihood is almost entirely dependent upon the salary he receives from the local church he serves. An evangelist’s income is derived exclusively from the offerings of the people to whom he preaches. A missionary’s ability to stay on the field is based on the money sent to him by people back home. And, the withholding of funds is a powerful tool by which people in the pew can hold leverage over a man in the pulpit. Dare we say it? Could it be that job security is a greater influence on Christian leaders today than the Holy Spirit? Have we seen the decline of standards in the modern church because preachers face a terrible dilemma of either giving in or losing their jobs? Perhaps it is with good reason that Scripture warns men not to be greedy of filthy lucre.

The devastating thing is that there have always been some all too willing to accommodate the whims of people. From Aaron, the first High Priest in Israel, to the Willow Creek movement in our own day, you can see a long line of church leaders who found it easier to be led than to lead. And the more preachers there are who accommodate the worldly interests of people in the pew, the more power the people gain in pressuring the remaining preachers who want to stand firm. The tide has turned so much in the modern church, that those who maintain an insistence on the pursuit of sanctification are actually made to look like the bad guys. Christian libertarians have successfully branded godly, holy men as legalists and their teachings as pharisaical. It is a clear case of calling good evil (Isaiah 5:20). And the general population in the church is so convinced that there appears to be no means of stopping the flood of worldliness that is overwhelming the church.

In spite of this, there is a simple solution. The whole matter could be resolved if each and every child of God made a personal commitment to obey God’s commandments. His commandments are still the same as they have always been.

  • Come out from among them and be ye separate.
  • Touch not the unclean thing.
  • Adorn yourselves in modest apparel.
  • Love not the world, neither the things in the world.
  • Be not conformed to this world.
  • Possess your vessel in sanctification and in honor.
  • Deny ungodliness and worldly lusts and live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world.
  • Abstain from all appearance of evil.
  • Be ye holy, as I am holy.

After all, This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments and his commandments are not grievous (I John 5:3). Keeping God’s commandments is not a burden of legalism; it is an act of loving obedience to the one who delivered us from enslavement to the flesh. Of course God wants us to deny ourselves those things from which He delivered us, and those things which bring us dangerously close to them. Why would He deliver us from the consequences of those things if He did not want us to discontinue our participation in them?

  • Oh, I forgot. Jesus openly associated with publicans and sinners, and somehow this is supposed to justify a Christian’s participation in worldly activities. There is an interesting thing to note about this though. Jesus never sinned (I John 3:5; I Peter 2:22), and His message to these worldly people was always the same, Go, and sin no more. Not bad advice for today. Would you agree?

    • Halloween Doesn’t Happen At Our House

    Literature, , ,

    by David E. Moss

    October 31 brings visions of pumpkins with distorted faces, costumes of many and varied types, candy and apples and school parties and those immortal words, “Trick or Treat.” But none of this take place at our house. We do not decorate for Halloween or even think of it as anything worthy of our attention. We acknowledge that it takes place, but only as something “they” do and not us.

    Some think that we are silly for such an attitude, that we are depriving our children of an innocent time of fun. While opportunities of fun may abound at Halloween time, I, for one, do not believe it is an innocent “holiday.” Consider the following documented information:

    1. “The American celebration {of Halloween} rests upon Scottish and Irish folk customs which can be traced in direct line from pre-Christian times. Although Halloween has become a night of celebration to many, its beginnings were quite otherwise. The earliest Halloween celebrations were held by the Druids in honor of Saman, lord of the dead, whose festival fell on November 1st.” (Halloween Through 20 Centuries by Ralph Linton)

    2. “It was the Druids belief that on the eve of this festival, Saman, lord of the dead, called together the wicked souls (spirits) that within the past 12 months had been condemned to inhabit the bodies of animals.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 12, pages 857-858)

    3. “The Druids, an order of priests {not Christian} in ancient Gaul and Britain, believed that on Halloween, ghosts, spirits, witches, and elves came out to harm people. They thought the cat was sacred and believed that cats had once been humans, but were changed as a punishment for evil deeds. From these Druidic beliefs come the present-day use of witches, ghosts, and cats in Halloween festivities.” (World 1 Book Encyclopedia pages 3245-3246)

      These pagans believed that on one night of the year the souls of the dead returned to their original homes. These wandering spirits were in the habit of haunting the living, but there was a way in which these ghosts might be exorcized. To exorcize these ghosts, that is to free yourself from an evil spirit, a person would have to set out food, give the demons a treat, and provide shelter for them for the night. If you didn’t, they would “trick” you by casting a spell on you or hurting you.

      “It was the Celts who chose the date of October 31 as their New Year’s Eve and who originally intended it as a celebration of everything wicked, evil, and dead. Also, during their celebration they would gather around the campfire, and offer their animals, their crops, and sometimes themselves as a sacrifice. The celebration remained much the same after the Romans conquered the Celts around 43 A. D. The Romans, however, added a ceremony honoring their goddess of fruit and trees and thus the association with apples, and the custom of bobbing for them.” (World Book Encyclopedia pages 24-25)

    4. “The apparently harmless lighted pumpkin face of Jack-O’-lantern” is an ancient symbol of a damned soul. They were named for a man called Jack who could not enter heaven or hell. As a result, he was doomed to wander in darkness with his lantern until Judgment Day. Fearful of spooks…folks began to hollow out turnips and pumpkins and placing lighted candles inside to scare away evil spirits from the house.” (The Book of Festive Holidays, page 125)

    The above information clearly shows the roots of Halloween. The symbolism represents pagan and occultist practices and is nothing in which a Christian should desire to participate. Having children dress up as ghosts and witches and devils encourages them to take lightly a matter that Scripture considers to be very dangerous. Even the attempt to side step the issue by having our children dress up as some “acceptable” characters such as animals, cowboys and Indians, doctors and nurses, or even Bible characters, sends a faulty message to impressionable young minds. As far as they are concerned they are still participating in Halloween.

    When I was a kid, adults consistently told us that “there was no such thing as ghosts.” Today, not only is it widely accepted that there is a mystical world of spirits out there, it is also widely respected. Witches have come out of the closet. They openly peddle their wares. Even Malls allow them to have shows in their corridors. Ouji Boards are popular games. Dungeons and Dragons is a luring activity. Just watch the newspapers when October 31 rolls around this year and you will see the reports of occultists openly and unashamedly observing this most sacred day in the year for these evil practitioners.

    Thomas W,. Wedge, a former deputy sheriff from Logan County, Ohio, is convinced that the occult is alive and well. He spent 14 years investigating crimes that appeared to be occult related. One case involved 16 year old Sean Sellers, who ended up on death row in Oklahoma. “At midnight on March 5, 1986, Sean donned black underwear and, standing before a makeshift altar in his Oklahoma City bedroom, performed a ritual summoning demons to enter his body. He then took a .44 magnum pistol and killed both of his sleeping parents because, as he told police, ‘they interfered with my religion’.”

    Officer Wedge now presents seminars to policemen around the country on how to deal with the occult. He says, “It does not matter what you and I believe. It’s what they believe that makes them dangerous. We might laugh, and you might think it’s funny, but it can cost you your life… Police traditionally are trained to deal with things we can lay our hands on,” he said. “For the first time, we in law enforcement are dealing with something we can’t shoot at, can’t handcuff. And it is very dangerous.” (The Buffalo News)

    In Deuteronomy 18:9-13, God says, When thou are come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times or an enchanter, or a witch. Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God.

    In the New Testament, God says, Abstain from all appearance of evil (I Thessalonians 5:22).

    Please distinguish between human wisdom and godly counsel in this matter. Think seriously about the reasonableness of Christians participating in a holiday that has never had any other association than the celebration of evil. Do not even be concerned about providing an alternative. Many times, Christian alternatives to pagan ideas only serve to give attention to the pagan ideas and the intent of the alternative is lost.

    As Christians, we do not observe, in any form, Hindu holidays, Buddhist holidays, Islamic holidays, etc. Why should we give any recognition to a holiday that honors the enemy of Christ. It is my conviction that no Christian home should be decorated for Halloween, that no Christian children should go “trick-or-treating,” and that October 31 should be just another day on the calender for we who follow Christ.

    An Introduction to CCM

    Literature, , , ,
    (Contemporary Christian Music) – or – Should We Be Introduced to It at All?

    by David E. Moss

    Part 1

    Music will never die as an issue in the church because it is too much a part of what we do in worship. We must, therefore, keep ourselves informed as to the trends, philosophies, and influences which are constantly being pressed upon Christian music in our modern world. Otherwise, our ignorance may allow us to be led down a path that irritates God.

    Contemporary Christian Music is the industry that predominantly determines those trends and philosophies that influence Christian music today. Its primary emphasis is to produce and promote secular music that has been Christianized. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines the word “contemporary” as meaning in one sense “happening, existing, living, or coming into being during the same period of time, simultaneous.” But the same dictionary gives another sense to this word as “marked by characteristics of the present period, modern.” It is in this second sense that promoters of Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) identify their product. In other words, CCM is not just Christian music that has been written in our times, but it is “Christian music” that is characterized by the culture of our times.

    This is exactly what CCM claims for itself. In a statement taken from an internet website titled “The Almost Definitive Contemporary Christian Music Hot Page,” the promoters of this industry put this definition in their own words.

    What is Contemprary Christian Music?

    Christian Music has been around in some form for almost 2000 years, since the time of Christ. But what exactly is Contemporary Christian Music? Before the early 1970’s, Christian Music could be categorized as either Traditional Hymns, Southern Gospel or as Traditional Black Gospel styles. From the Peace Movement of the late 1960’s came a time of Christian revival for young people across the country. This concurrent movement was known as the Jesus Movement. From the Jesus Movement, came many new Christians who were anxious to tell others about Jesus, but found the traditional methods of sharing and worshiping restrictive and out-dated. Many of these Jesus People started developing new worshiping and witnessing styles. An effort was made to write music which was culturally relevant or contemporary. The desire was to create music that would appeal to the current searching generation. Thus was born Contemporary Christian Music. From the early days of the Jesus Movement, new Christian singers such as Larry Norman, Randy Stonehill and Chuck Girard emerged to reach their generation. The name Contemporary Christian Music was coined to distinguish this style of music from the more traditional forms of religious music. The word contemporary has proven to be an appropriate description of this music over the last twenty years, as the styles have kept up with its secular counterpart. The ever evolving state of C.C.M. includes such diverse and contemporary styles as rock, jazz, blues, dance, metal, rap, alternative, new age, grunge, punk, thrash, death, gothic and industrial [etc.]. Yet regardless of the form, the essences of all Contemporary Christian Music is the same – to share God’s love to the current generation in a way that can be both understood and enjoyed. This Contemporary Christian Music Hot Page is designed to be a current guide of the different C.C.M resources on the Internet. Any current information would be welcomed and encouraged to help keep this place, contemporary. As far as whether or not you agree or disagree with the particular spiritual condition of some of the artists listed here — Sorry — Deal with It!

    [Emphasis theirs.]

    Thus, CCM consists of taking whatever style of secular music is currently popular in the world and attaching “Christian” words to it. As a result, we have people adorned in 1960’s dress and attitudes [you just have to deal with their lack of a spiritual testimony which is not relevant to the music] playing drums and electric guitars leading the worship services in our churches.

    The promoters of CCM argue that all styles of music are morally neutral. By this argument they seek to nullify the traditionalists’ objections based on the biblical principles of not loving the world (1 John 2:15-17) and not touching the unclean thing (2 Corinthians 6:17).

    For too many well meaning Christian people this rationale has worked. They have given in to the pressure and either have provided an alternative contemporary service for those who desire it, or have incorporated contemporary elements into the regular worship service. Once again, the word contemporary is used in this context not as meaning chronologically concurrent, but as meaning culturally relevant. Thus church worship services have come to look and feel exactly like secular or worldly gatherings and events.

    For those of us who recognize that loving not the world, neither the things that are in the world includes worldly music, what can we do to prevent this from happening to us? We must have a commitment to the sacred traditions of hymns and gospel songs. We must draw the line earlier rather than later, and stop the incremental change in our music before it gets started.

    Granted this is not easy because the change is usually unnoticeable in the beginning. You do not usually show up for services one Sunday and find out that your local church has completely converted to contemporary worship. It generally comes about in small steps. It begins with the introduction of a very lightly pop styled song. The difference between the new song and the traditional gospel song is sometimes so slight it is nearly imperceptible even to those who have some knowledge of music. This new song is enjoyable and seems harmless. No one gives it a thought. But then comes another song that is a little more pop styled. It is not much different than the first new song. It is, however, a little more noticeably different from the traditional gospel song than the first new song was, but the conditioning process has already begun. So the second new song is readily accepted also. Then another new song comes along
    that goes a step further. And so the process continues, gradually conditioning a congregation to accept ever increasingly worldly songs into their worship services. Then one day, someone wakes up and says, “How did we get where we are?”

    We have gotten where we are because we did not draw the line early enough. It is not easy to draw the line early in the process because at that point there does not seem to be a problem. It is just like the frog who was set in cold water and very gradually boiled to death. When was the water too warm? When was it too late for him to jump out? But perhaps a better question is, Why was he in the pot in the first place?

    Part 2 – Choosing Our Values for Music and Worship

    The issue of music is a never ending one among Christians and it is being discussed everywhere. Recently, there was an article published in a newsletter from a Christian health care concern stating that their staff had not been able to reach a consensus on the subject even after hours of wrangling. It is quite interesting that such an organization would print a statement like this. It is not a local church or even a para-church ministry, but the differences in music values among their staff had become a hot issue and for some reason they wanted everyone to know about it.

    Because music is so important to the life of the church, it is imperative that we understand the issues involved in this continuing debate so that we are able to make wise choices in the music we use to worship the LORD. We need to lay a foundation of good biblical values in music and learn how to apply these values in specific practical ways as we mold the worship services of our local church.

    Competing Models For Worship

    A model is a pattern of something to be made or copied. For example, developments often have model homes. No one actually lives in the model home, but it is built exactly like a home someone could build for themselves. It is provided as an example or pattern for prospective home buyers to observe. This term “model” is used also for patterns by which programs or organizations are structured. It is used in this article to refer to different types or styles of worship.

    There have always been different worship models in the church. Some models are very ritualistic while others are much freer and spontaneous. Some worship models are very orderly and reverent, while others encourage the expression of unreserved emotions. Among
    evangelical churches there are two basic worship models being used today.

    The Traditional Worship Model

    The traditional worship model came out of the Reformation. Prior to the Reformation, the Catholic church had placed the “altar” as the central feature of the platform in church buildings. This made ritual and liturgy the most important element of worship. But the most significant development in worship during the Reformation was the replacing of the “altar” with the pulpit. The purpose of giving the pulpit this place of honor was to elevate preaching to the most important part of worship. To this day, preaching continues to have a significant part in the traditional worship service. Sermons are Bible based and teach doctrine and godly lifestyle principles. Other elements in this worship model include Scripture reading, prayer, congregational singing from a hymn book of traditional hymns and gospel songs as they were originally written, choral music of traditional hymn arrangements and scriptural anthems, and special music by individuals or small groups, vocal and instrumental, typically with live accompaniment on the organ or piano, consisting of traditional Christian music.

    The characteristic atmosphere of this worship model is reverence. The belief is that as Christians gather to worship God, He is to be revered in a manner that shows deferential respect in an orderly manner.

    1 Corinthians 14:26-33 – How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. …Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

    For a traditional worship service, people generally dress up in their “Sunday best” as a gesture of honor to God. While there are times of quietness in the service as the congregation bows before God together, there are times of great passion as well as the hymns are sung from the heart and the preaching is heard with a teachable spirit.

    The traditional worship model holds to the belief that the purpose of the assembly of believers is to honor God for all that He is as God and all that He has done for us through His Son Jesus Christ, and to edify and fortify believers for their daily walk in Him. The lost are always welcome, but the hope is that through what they observe they will be brought to conviction and call on the name of the Lord to be saved.

    1 Corinthians 14:23-25 – If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

    The Contemporary Worship Model

    There is a new worship model that has rippled through Christianity, crossing all denominational lines including evangelical and fundamental churches. This worship model is called contemporary worship. Sometimes you will see the notices on the church bulletin board as you drive by announcing a time for a traditional service and a time for a contemporary service.

    The contemporary service has several unique elements. There is often a worship team which stands on the platform, with microphones in hand, and leads the congregational singing. Songs are generally of a style called “praise and worship” consisting of choruses and other songs of lively tempo. The words are shown on an overhead screen and are learned by listening to the worship team sing them over and over. Usually, no written music is provided and no hymn books are used. This song service may last for a considerable period of time. It may include clapping, waving of the arms, and swaying body movements. The music is often accompanied by a “praise band” consisting of drums, electric guitars, tambourines, and other such instruments. Special music is often accompanied by pre-recorded music on cassette tape and consists of songs from the Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) repertoire. Interpretive movement (dancing) is becoming a common element of this worship model. (As spirited music naturally generates body movements, this is a logical outcome.) Drama may at times replace preaching, and the preaching that does take place is often abbreviated. The content of sermons generally consists of social issues and relationships matters rather than Bible content and doctrine.

    The characteristic atmosphere of this worship model is one of entertainment. The pulpit is either made portable or removed altogether and the focus is on a great deal of activity on the platform which the congregation comes to watch. Every performance is applauded. Many attend these services in casual clothes. The stated objective is to be “seeker friendly.” This means the “worship service” is constructed in such a way as to be non-offensive and inviting to those who are not yet Christians. It is considered spiritually incorrect to call them “lost,” so they are called “seekers.” It is considered a bad thing to offend seekers with direct gospel preaching, so they are lured into Christianity by nice entertainment.

    This worship model has several sources. The so called “praise and worship” music came out of the charismatic movement. The use of contemporary music and drama grew out of Willow Creek Community Church in Chicago, a large church founded on the desire to appeal to the interests of young people and the unchurched rather than biblical principles. This worship model has also been fostered by new-evangelical pragmatism that rejected separation and adopted assimilation as a preferred approach to Christianity.

    Basic Values In Music

    These differing worship models are based on extremely different values.

    Traditional Values

    1. Music comes directly from the heart of God. God Himself delights in singing and He encourages His people to sing.

      Zephaniah 3:17 – The LORD thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will rest in his love, he will joy over thee with singing.

      Ephesians 5:18-19 – …but be filled with the Spirit; speaking to yourselves in psalms and
      hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.

    2. Thus music is an important subject to God. He has definite thoughts about the subject which He has communicated in His Word. References to music can be found in at least 393 verses of Scripture in 43 different books of the Bible

    3. Music contains moral elements. It is therefore necessary for us to understand what those moral elements are so that we can include in the music of our worship services and our Christian lives only those forms of music that are acceptable unto God.

      God gave us a principle of primary importance in Ephesians 5:10 – Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.

      David played music that drove away an evil spirit from King Saul. The moral elements of David’s new song could not be tolerated by the evil spirit. This illustrates the existence of moral elements in instrumental music apart from the words of a song.

      And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him. (1 Samuel 16:23)

      The Bible Speaks of:
      • The song of drunkards (Psalm 69:12)
      • The song of fools (Ecclesiastes 7:5)
      • The song of derision (Lamentations 3:14)
      • The song to a heavy heart (Proverbs 25:20)
      • The song of vanity (Job 35:13)
      • The song of an harlot (Isaiah 23:15-16)
      The Bible then speaks of:

      • The New Song. The new song stands in contrast to the old songs of the flesh listed above. It is a song that has the capacity to praise God.

        And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the LORD. (Psalms 40:3)

        Praise ye the LORD. Sing unto the LORD a new song, and his praise in the congregation of saints. (Psalms 149:1)

    4. The words of a Christian song should be biblically accurate, doctrinally sound and edifying for believers.

      First of all we are to maintain soundness in our doctrine.

      Titus 2:1 – But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:

      Secondly, every element of a church service, including the music, is to provide edification to those who attend.

      Psalms 47:7 – For God is the King of all the earth: sing ye praises with understanding.

      1 Corinthians 14:15 – What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

    5. The musical message of a Christian song should agree morally and spiritually with the message of the words.

      2 Corinthians 6:14-17 – Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.

      Psalms 144:9 – I will sing a new song unto thee, O God: upon a psaltery and an instrument of ten strings will I sing praises unto thee. Note: The new song would lose its effect if the old music was the vehicle used to convey the words.

    6. Music is an important part of worship. While the purpose of worship is to honor God and glorify Him, all music used in worship services should contribute to that goal.

      Isaiah 12:4-5 – And in that day shall ye say, Praise the LORD, call upon his name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted. Sing unto the LORD; for he hath done excellent things: this is known in all the earth.

    7. It is the Spirit of God that directs us to sing God honoring music. Being filled with the Spirit and with the word of Christ comes first, then comes the musical response.

      Ephesians 5:18-19 – And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.

      Colossians 3:16 – Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

    Contemporary Music Values

    1. God made music and everything God made is good. Man is, therefore, free to enjoy all forms of music as a gift from God.

      Note: When God created the earth, he saw that it was good. But when sin entered the world, a curse was placed upon creation that will be eliminated only by the making of a new heaven and new earth. Man has perverted many of the good things God made and music is one of them.

    2. Music is morally neutral. There are no moral elements in music.

      Note: This is often illustrated by playing one note on the piano and asking, what can possibly be immoral about that note? The rationalization then is that all music is merely the compilation of individual notes that are morally neutral. However, consider a contrasting illustration. If you point to one letter in the alphabet, you can say that one letter is morally neutral by itself. Following the above logic, it would then be impossible to have any immoral literature, because all writing would be merely the compilation of individual letters that are morally neutral. It is possible, though, to take the same group of letters and arrange them
      into entirely different messages. For example, the letters e, i, l, and v can be arranged to say “live” which is good, or “evil” which is bad. The same is true about the arranging of individual musical notes. Depending upon how they are arranged they can convey a moral or an immoral message.

    3. All forms of music are acceptable unto God in our worshiping Him. Because I am His child, whatever I do glorifies God.

      Note: The Israelites learned that God did not accept everything they did in worshiping Him (Isaiah 58). It was the lesson of Cain all over again. Cain brought his offering to God in a very sincere manner, but God rejected it. Just because we say we are worshiping God does not mean that God accepts our worship. Whatever we do is not acceptable unto Him simply because we are doing it.

    4. Music is a means by which we can be drawn into the spirit.

      Note: When music is used as a means to draw people into the “spirit,” all it does is create an emotionalism that is called spiritual, but in reality is not. True worship can be very emotional, but emotions are to be the result of and not the cause of true worship. The proper approach to worship will produce godly emotions. The improper approach will produce fleshly emotions.

    5. Contemporary Christian music is a good thing because it draws young people to church and some even get saved.

      Note: This is classic pragmatism in which the ends justify the means. But in God’s eyes it is never right to do wrong, even if the goal is a noble one.

    6. The purpose of worship is to bring people into fellowship with one another.

      Note: This makes worship man centered. However, the Bible never suggests that worship is about man. Worship is about God and ascribing to Him the worth of which He is worthy.

    Making Choices

    In light of these values, what are some of the choices we must make in order to preserve the traditional worship model in our local church? Some churches do still use the traditional worship model exclusively, but they are becoming fewer all the time. The pressure is on to change and change is occurring everywhere. Some churches use the contemporary worship model exclusively. Some churches have two different services, one traditional and one contemporary. And some churches seek to blend the two worship models together using some elements of each in the same service. What is the right thing for us to do?

    We must desire first and foremost to please God and not men. Contemporary thoughts on music and worship make worship to be man centered. Worship services, they say, must appeal to those who participate. However, worship is not about us as humans; it is about God. If we can keep our focus on pleasing God and not men, our choices in worship will become much clearer.

    We must choose values in music and worship that are biblical and acceptable unto God. These will serve as our foundation in making good choices regarding how we worship God. This requires a constant reminder of what God says about music, to keep our senses exercised in discerning both bad and good.

    We must maintain separation from the world. Since the basis of contemporary Christian music is the assimilation of worldly music, if we can keep our commitment to remain separate from the world, a lot of musical choices will automatically be eliminated. This principle includes separation from music companies which make a great deal of profit from the production and sale of worldly music on “Christian” labels. If we do not purchase music from those who produce contemporary Christian music, we will also protect ourselves from the influences of that industry.

    Those who participate in the music of the church should be those who are walking in the Lord and growing in His Word. Their testimony outside the church should be in harmony with the testimony of their participation in the worship of our Holy God and Precious Savior who bled and died and rose again to rescue them from sin and the world. The desire of the heart of every participant must be to please God and not men.

    We must determine the limits beyond which we will not go in specific musical selections. Sometimes this may be difficult to maintain. Sometimes questions are raised which seem to suggest gray areas where compromise is reasonable. For example, is a particular song by a particular song writer which is produced by a particular recording company and sung by a particular musical artist okay as long as this particular song seems to meet our music policy even if other songs from the same source are not okay? Do we throw a “good” song out just because of its associations? Is a particular song not okay just because a few notes are a little over the line? How many notes does it take to make a song bad? Besides, aren’t there some songs in our hymn book that go a little over the line? Do the words of every song have to be absolutely from the Bible? Granted the details of musical elements can become very involved and complicated and tedious at times to consider.

    But our rationalization should never be — how far can we go and still be okay. Rather it should be – what are the choices we must make to insure that we are never guilty of compromising the glory of God.

    Some simple choices like these will preserve a traditional worship style that honors God and shows Him true reverence. It will encourage a worship style that will edify believers and bring true conviction to those who have ears to hear, eyes to see, and hearts to understand. As time goes by, making these choices will be increasingly difficult. But as the contemporary Christian music and worship movements gain momentum, we must be ever more conscious of the care we must take in preserving that which is acceptable unto God.

    A Need for Revival

    Literature, , , ,

    by David E. Moss

    In Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, there lives a quaint people called the Amish. They are different from everyone else, dressing in very plain clothing, traveling by horse and buggy instead of motorized vehicles, and living without electricity. Because they are so different, they are also a curiosity. People travel from all over the country to observe these folks and their ways. Tourists look at these people with wondering eyes and ask many questions to try to understand how they can live in such contrast to the world around them. They wonder why they persist in an unchanged culture while everyone else has conformed to the gradual changes that have taken place in civilized human society. From time to time there are individual Amish people who fall away from the old ways and adopt a modern lifestyle. But the faithful continue on, unmoved by all the conveniences and opportunities for change that lie at their finger tips.

    Would to God that we could say the same for the evangelical Christian community. If it were unchanged from its biblical foundations, the church too would be a curiosity in this world. People would gaze at it with the same wonder, being puzzled at how Christians could live so differently, believe so dogmatically, and walk so confidently in the midst of such a perverse and crooked generation. They would ask questions and try to understand what keeps Christians focused and unmoved by all the things that stand in contrast to their faith. And there would be more than curiosity. In seeing the difference between Christians and themselves, people in the world would ask how they could escape their culture of darkness and join the Christians in the society of light.

    But this is not the way it is. The evangelical Christian community has adopted change as its policy and has assimilated the fads, philosophies, and follies of each new generation to such an extent that the Christian’s vocabulary, wardrobe, music, forms of
    entertainment, social mores, and moral values have become a mirror image of the world’s. Now, the world’s only curiosity about the church is its claim to be different.

    How did it get to be this way? Is this really what God wants for the church? Can it be changed?

    God’s Desire For The Church

    In 2 Corinthians 6:4-18, God makes an emphatic statement about the distinction that exists and should be maintained between His people and the people of the world.

    14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

    15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

    16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

    17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

    18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

    He says that a yoke between believers and unbelievers is an unequal yoke and should not be entered into. He also says that believers should be separated from unbelievers and should not touch the unclean thing.

    1. God wants the distinction that exists between His people and the people of the world to be maintained.

      There is a profound difference between believers and unbelievers. Believers are characterized by the righteousness of God with which they are clothed in the moment of their salvation. They walk in the light which reveals the way of truth and godliness.
      They are the body of Christ, which is intended to be a reflection of the Savior to the lost world He seeks to redeem. They are people of faith, who believe God implicitly and trust Him for everything from daily provisions to eternal security. Unbelievers could not
      be any more different from believers than they are. Unbelievers walk the path of unrighteousness and do the opposite of everything that pleases God. They walk in darkness and do not the truth, having changed the truth of God into a lie. They are the children of the devil, doing the works of the one who is the enemy of Christ. They are devoid of faith, refusing to glorify God as God, and changing the glory of the incorruptible God into an image of their own imagination. Between these two entities there could not be a stronger contrast. Believers are the temple of God, the place of His residence, housing the very substance of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). Unbelievers are idolaters, worshiping themselves, or other creatures, or evil spirits who have rebelled against the true God (Romans 1:18-32).

      God wants this profound difference between believers and unbelievers to be observed and protected by a practice of separation. God does not want believers to fellowship with unbelievers. That is, He does not want believers to participate with unbelievers in common activities, the moral implications of which contradict the righteousness of God. God does not want believers to have communion with unbelievers. That is, He does not want believers to share with unbelievers in anything that by association would dim a believer’s testimony. God does not want believers to have any concord with unbelievers. That is, He does not want believers to make compromises with unbelievers that would devalue a believer’s integrity by making him appear to be similar to an unbeliever. God does not want believers to have any part with an unbeliever. That is, He does not want believers to participate with unbelievers
      in joint ventures that would obscure the distinction between the faithful and the faithless. God insists that there is not nor can be any agreement between believers and unbelievers. Believers are the temple of God. Unbelievers are idolaters. The reality of the distinction is clear. The maintaining of the distinction is the spiritual duty of a child of God.

    2. God wants believers to refrain from touching the unclean thing.

      The obvious thing from this part of God’s directive is that something is unclean and God wants His people to have absolutely no contact with this unclean thing.

      What is the unclean thing? In the Old Testament, God named specific things that were unclean. They consisted of such specific things as the carcasses of unclean animals and the bodies of people who have certain diseases or infirmities. In this New
      Testament context, God makes it equally clear what He considers to be unclean. Unrighteousness, darkness, Belial, infidelity, idolatry, and, by implication, anything associated with these matters clearly constitute the unclean thing to which God refers as taboo for believers. Although these things appear to be of an intangible nature, they have very specific tangible applications.

      What does it mean not to touch the unclean thing? It means to have no contact with those things. Contact would soil or spoil the testimony of a believer and the New Testament is replete with instruction concerning God’s desire for the cleanness of His people. He calls for purity in 1 Timothy 1:5. He calls for holiness in 1 Peter 1:15-16. He calls for sanctification in 1 Thessalonians 4:3-4. He calls for chastity in 2 Corinthians 11:2. He calls for a good and pure conscience in 1 Timothy 1:19 and 3:9. He calls for godliness in 1 Timothy 4:7. He calls for righteous living in Titus 2:12. This can only be achieved by a concerted effort to refrain from touching those things in this world that are contaminated with uncleanness.

      God makes it abundantly clear that as His people are delivered from sin by His Son Jesus Christ, they are given a definite distinction from those who have not been delivered. He wants that distinction to be visible and obvious and constantly on display. Let your light so shine before men, Jesus said, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. Do not hide it under a bushel basket. Put it in a visible place for all to see (Matthew 5:14-16).

    The Crisis

    Many believers have rejected this directive from God. Instead of maintaining a distinction between themselves and the people of the world, many Christians have embraced the people of the world and have emulated their appearance, values, activities, etc. Instead of refraining from touching the unclean thing, many Christians have refused even to consider what the unclean thing might be, and have chosen rather to touch everything that is available to them in this world without making moral judgments about doing so.

    As a result there is a serious identity crisis in Christianity. The world looks at Christianity and it cannot see a reflection of Jesus Christ, because Christians do not resemble Him. Christians today tend to resemble the world. Consequently, the world looks at Christianity and sees a mirror image of itself. It sees the same moral flaws, the same selfish ambitions, and the same diabolical ethics that characterize its own. As a result, the world is uninterested and unmoved by the message of the church because it is a hollow message being proclaimed by those who by appearance do not seem to have been affected by it.

    What are the mistakes that Christians have made that has brought about this crisis of identity?

    1. The Acceptance of the World

      God said that Christians are not to love the world, neither are they to love the things that are in the world (I John 2:15). Yet that is exactly what they do. Christians love the way the world dresses. In spite of God’s insistence that His people dress modestly, skimpy and revealing clothing are typically worn by professing believers. In addition, cries of legalism are cast into the face of any Christian who attempts to define modest guidelines for the clothes Christians choose to wear. Many Christians also love the way the world sings. There is a popular argument that modern styles of music are being used by Christians to help certain groups of people identify with the message of the church. But what really happens is that when Christians adopt the world’s design of musical styles, Christians learn to love them and tend to use them as a means of entertainment and personal gratification and not just as bait for seekers. Many Christians also love other things that are in the world including such things as
      questionable forms of entertainment, unethical choices, and immoral values. For example, on more than one occasion I have been approached by a young couple who wanted to be married, of whom both professed to be believers, yet they were already living together in the same house or apartment and were already sexually active as if they were husband and wife. When confronted with the immoral nature of their living conditions, some of these young people have been literally appalled that I would suggest they were committing sin and living in fornication. They reasoned that since they were engaged and fully committed to be married, their living conditions were completely justified. They had no sense of guilt or remorse for what they were doing and resented that I tried to make them feel guilty. They had no idea that they had succumbed to the influence of the world’s moral values which contradict the Word of God. [The number of unmarried couple households in the USA increased sevenfold from 1970 to 1996. In 1970 there were 523,000 unmarried couple households. In 1996 there were 4 million. The world clearly accepts living together without being married as a legitimate lifestyle. God clearly rejects it (1 Corinthians 7:1-2) yet many Christians accept it right along with the world.] The saddest thing of all is that in each case like this that I know of, the couple was able to find another preacher who was willing to perform a church wedding ceremony for them without confronting the moral implications of their living conditions. Such moral values do not come from the Bible. They come from the world. And many Christians love the world’s low standards, gleefully living by them in spite of the what God has said.

    2. The Indulgence of the Flesh

      The Bible says that the works of the flesh stand in stark contrast to the fruit of the Spirit and that if we walk in the Spirit, we shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh (Galatians 5:16-26). Yet Christians seem to be completely devoid of discernment in distinguishing between the things of the flesh and the things of the Spirit. In their love for the world, Christians have allowed the will of their flesh to rationalize away the immoral connotations of many activities. In the spirit of politically correct speech, adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, revellings, and such like (which constitute the works of the flesh – Galatians 19-21) are repackaged in religiously palatable euphemisms, allowing Christians to indulge in them without a sense of guilt. For example, a popular Christian musical artist was discovered to be having an affair with a man in violation of her marriage covenant. Yet she was successfully painted as a victim, allowed to go through an appropriate time of healing and in the process maintained an undiminished level of popularity with her fans. In another case, a nationally known evangelical preacher experienced difficulties in his marriage and made
      a promise to his congregation that if his marriage ever ended in divorce he would resign as pastor; yet when the divorce actually occurred, he was allowed to break his promise to the people and ignore the biblical qualifications for serving as a pastor. In spite of these things, He continues to be heralded as one of America’s great preachers. In other cases, Christians are known to have abortions, live as homosexuals, consult ouji boards, play the lottery, drink alcohol, sow discord among the brethren, lie, cause
      divisions and split churches, yet they still preach in pulpits, serve on church boards, teach Sunday School classes and proudly profess their Christianity. Something is seriously wrong when the flesh can be so readily indulged by those who earnestly align
      themselves with Christ and in spite of it they are still applauded as notable Christians.

    3. The Failure to take the Devil seriously.

      The Bible says that the Devil is our adversary, acting like a roaring lion, determined to devour his prey (1 Peter 5:7). Yet many Christians exert little or no effort in trying to resist him. They seem ignorant of his wiles and his uncanny ability to transform himself into an angel of light. Thus they fall prey to the Devil’s most subtle trick. He infiltrates the very ranks of professing Christians and successfully deceives some of the most well meaning of them. The trick of the Devil has been to create a wide diversity of doctrines within the church, many of which actually contradict each other. Based on this diversity, many Christians are then confused as to which is true and which is not. The diversity of beliefs among professing Christians then is used to convince many that much of the Word of God is irrelevant and should be set aside for the sake of the more important issues of peace and unity. By this means, the Devil successfully prevents much of God’s truth from be taken seriously by those who profess to believe. As a result, Christians who still preach the whole counsel of God are shouted down as legalists, bigots, and promoters of negativism by fellow Christians, while the Devil stands in the corner and laughs. The sad result is a fulfillment of a biblical prediction. In the latter times, the Bible says, some who have been part of the faith will depart because they gave heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils (1 Timothy 4:1).

    Conclusion

    Because they have loved the things of the world, have given in to the will of the flesh, and have failed to resist the Devil, many professing Christians bear little resemblance to Jesus Christ. Instead, they look pretty much like everyone else. In fact, in many cases they look worse. By professing that Christ has made them to be different from everyone else in the world, yet appearing to be very much the same, Christians often come across as hypocrites. Many unbelievers refuse to attend church services or listen to a gospel witness because they have come to believe that all Christians are hypocrites. While some of the accusations of hypocrisy are merely stereotypical, far too many have legitimate grounds.

    God’s intention is that his redeemed people bear a testimony of the Savior to the lost world. This testimony is to consist of both word and deed. It is not enough for us to echo the words of the gospel; our lives must resound with a reflection of the person and
    nature of Christ. God said, Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the
    gospel     (Philippians 1:27).

    God appointed all believers to be participants in a holy and royal priesthood, offering up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ, and showing forth the praises of him who called them out of darkness into his marvelous light (1 Peter 2:5,9). As priests to the world, it is a Christian’s duty to publicly demonstrate the difference between what is holy and what it is unholy and between what is clean and what is unclean (Leviticus 10:10, 1 Peter 1:15-16).

    The same grace of God that brings salvation also teaches redeemed people that ungodliness and worldly lusts are to be denied in the pursuit of living soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world. The grace of God is intended to make a difference in a person’s life not only for eternity, but for the present experience on earth as well.

    It is God’s will that every believer know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honor (1 Thessalonians 4:4). This requires abstaining from unclean things that are available in this world. It requires restraint and discipline in faithfully walking in the Spirit so that the works of the flesh will not be fulfilled in the life of a believer (Galatians 5:16).

    It is necessary for Christians to be aware of the enemy, to take him seriously, and to resist him diligently. No believer need be intimidated by the Devil. God has promised that when a Christian resists the Devil, he will flee from them (James 4:7). It is necessary, however, for Christians to actively and diligently resist the Devil, or he will not flee.

    The world, the flesh, and the Devil have done us in. The Bible says that friendship with the world is enmity with God (James 4:4). The Bible says that he who sows to the flesh reaps corruption (Galatians 6:8M). The Bible says that the snare of the devil brings reproach (1 Timothy 3:7). When a lost world cannot see Christ in Christians because large numbers of them are at enmity with God, are contaminated with corruption and are bearing reproach, there is a serious crisis in Christianity.

    What can be done about it? It is because of this crisis that many are calling for revival. They would like to see a passionate movement sweep across Christianity in which masses of professing believers are compelled to fall on their knees and renew
    themselves spiritually before God. There have been such revivals in the past, but the results have often been tenuous and short lived. Biblical revival actually works in a reverse of this plan. It begins with the individual and swells as others become personally involved one at a time. Repentance is not corporate, but personal. Sanctification is not corporate, but personal. Each professing Christian must examine himself (2 Corinthians 13:5; 1 Corinthians 11:28). Each professing Christian must make himself transparent before God (Psalm 139:23-24). Each professing Christian must personally commit himself to spiritual renewal (Romans 12:1-2). Consider what would happen if many Christians did this. Each individual would be brought into harmony with the image of Christ. Collectively, they would resemble each other because they all individually resemble the same Person. The impact of this collective image of Christ on the lost world would be overwhelming. Christians would become a curiosity to the world, not because they are numbly following a movement, but because each and everyone is equally committed to their Lord and Master. The
    people of the world would ask questions and try to understand what keeps Christians focused and unmoved by all the things that stand in contrast to their faith. And in seeing the difference between Christians and themselves, people in the world would begin to ask how they could escape their culture of darkness and join the Christians in the society of light.

    It is okay to pray that revival would sweep across Christianity. But too often, those who pray for revival sit passively and wait for it to start someplace else. If revival will ever occur, it is going to have to start with me — and with you. You and I are the key to solving the crisis in Christianity.