Matt Flannagan has written a post titled “Contra Mundum: What’s wrong with imposing your beliefs onto others?”. With all due respect to Matt, I think that he is making an error in trying to remove revelation (given by God) from the argument, as shown here:

If it is wrong to impose one’s beliefs onto others then it follows that one is required to refrain from such impositions; further, any attempt to impose moral beliefs should be prevented. However, this claim is itself a moral belief and as we’ve just established, it is being imposed on others. Therefore the claim is self-defeating, those who defend it are attempting to impose a moral belief about not-imposing moral beliefs onto others.

A belief system must have a fixed reference point, otherwise it becomes a relativistic logical failure.

Matt concludes with

If the principles expounded are correct and accurately reflect justice then there is nothing wrong with imposing them onto others, even if they are religious beliefs.

I believe that this position is biblically indefensible when universally applied (as in this case), because in 1 Corinthians 5:11-13a Paul says

But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.” (NIV, emphasis added)

Matt also says

As for the counter examples, consider acts such as rape, assault or infanticide. I personally believe each of these practices is wrong for me to engage in. Further, I think it is wrong for others to do these things. In fact, I even support the commission of these acts being considered a crime punishable by the state. I am sure most would agree with me. However, if it were wrong to impose moral beliefs onto others then our position on rape, assault or infanticide would be unacceptable. We would have to leave others free to choose whether they wished to rape, assault or kill children – to do otherwise would be to impose our moral beliefs onto others.

Again, revelation has been left out of this argument. Rape, assault, and infanticide are all a violation of personal rights (i.e. a physical attack). God protects our personal rights (Ex 21:12-31), and therefore intervention by individuals and punishment by the state in justifiable (Rom 13:1-7). Similarly, God protects our property rights (Ex 22:1-15).

Conclusion

God has not appointed me as the Personal Morals Police so, for example, I will not attempt to impose my morals upon homosexuals who engage in consensual relationships, because it is no business of mine to judge those who are outside the church (if those homosexuals claim to be a part of the church the scenario changes). However, if an immoral act violates the personal or property rights of an individual (i.e. force is used/mutual consent is lacking) then I have a clear mandate for action: this is given by God and that action will have the appearance of imposing my beliefs upon others, when in fact I am enforcing God’s absolute moral code (e.g. murder is wrong).

The non-aggression axiom sums up the biblical position nicely: It is illicit to initiate or threaten invasive violence against a man or his legitimately owned property.

~~~~~~~~~~

On my other blog is a post titled Site Plug: Living Off the Smell of an Oily Rag (Or, How To Avoid Wasting Your Life), where I describe how wasting money is wasting your life because spending money is spending time. E.g., a person earning $20/hour who ignores the house-brand cheese and spends an extra $2 on big-name cheese has wasted the eleven minutes of their life that it took to earn those two after-tax dollars¹.

It is important to avoid legalism – buying big-name cheese/giving eleven minutes of your life to the cheese company is not a moral issue – but God does tell us to use our time wisely²:

Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. (Eph 5:15-16 NASB)

Also, we can use our time/money for things that have eternal value or things that have temporary (earthly) value. When we use our time/money to do things that have eternal value, i.e. they glorify God and further his kingdom, we will be rewarded:

For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work.

If any man’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. (1 Cor 3:11-15 NASB)

Would you rather have the big-name cheese or use the money to glorify God and have a reward in heaven? This is a matter of wisdom, not morals, so the choice is yours.

What do you think about the points that I have raised here?

~~~~~

1. I’ve used this as an example because the two types of cheese taste the same and almost certainly are the same thing in different wrappers. Then there’s sugar, rice, and so on.

2. In the Bible “wisdom” doesn’t mean “brain power”, it means “good moral character/godly character” and is the opposite of foolishness.

~~~~~~~~~~

On my other blog I wrote about the Nanny State fining property owners who allowed people to sit on their roof and watch car races. According to the news item

The infringement notice cited a clause of the Building Act that refers to using or permitting the “use of a building for a use for which it is not safe”.

Let’s have a look at what the Bible says about this sort of thing. Unlike modern Socialist/Marxist nanny states God didn’t make any laws that prevented people sitting on their roof and watching a camel race, but Deuteronomy 22:8 says

When you build a new house, you shall make a parapet for your roof, so that you will not bring bloodguilt on your house if anyone falls from it. (NASB)

Houses in ancient Israel usually had a flat roof, and often an external staircase would lead up to it. People would sleep on the roof when it was hot as well as going there at other times, and sometimes people would die after rolling off the roof when asleep (this brings a whole new meaning to the biblical phrase “fallen asleep”, which refers to the death of a person e.g. Matt 27:51-53).

If someone fell from your roof and died you carried the bloodguilt¹ arising from that, so God said that people should build a parapet or rail in order to avoid bloodguilt². These days most people are indoctrinated by the state and believe that someone who does not provide every safety measure is criminally liable when someone dies from a fall or whatever. I believe that God’s view is different, and if someone fell from a roof without a rail and died the property owner carried bloodguilt but had not committed a crime. Why so?

1. Deut 21:1-9 shows that bloodguilt was separate from criminal guilt, or at least could be separate from criminal guilt.
2. Someone who went onto a roof that did not have a rail did so of their own free will and chose to take the risk. Therefore if he fell was he ultimately responsible for his injury or death, and no crime had been committed.

The critical point is this: there was no crime of “failing to build a rail around a roof”. Instead each property owner had a choice of (a) not building a rail and risking bloodguilt or (b) building a rail and avoiding bloodguilt. It’s all about each person taking responsibility for their own actions and wearing the consequences of those actions (cf Ex 21:33-34).

How would a modern Socialist/Marxist nanny-state government handle this situation if it was ruling ancient Israel? It would say “People are falling off roofs and it is our job to stop this injustice, therefore we will make a law that requires railings of a specified height and strength. We will violate property rights by entering every property against the will of the owner in order to inspect the railings, because the end justifies the means. We will punish those who do not build a railing because they are endangering others and it is our job to prevent harm and maintain social order”.

Can you see the difference? God addresses a selfish interest (avoiding bloodguilt) and everyone gets a safety benefit as a result. Socialist/Marxist nanny states ride roughshod over personal and property rights in order to get a safety benefit for everyone, whilst also turning a bunch of people into criminals.

Conclusion

If the Israelites had wanted to sit on their roof and watch the Dromedarian Derby camel race there would have been nothing to stop them, because the Bible is essentially libertarian. There would not have been any agents of the state patrolling the streets during the race to see who was sitting on a roof, fining those people, and then justifying it by saying “Our role is the health and safety of people”. God did not create a nanny state that said to people “This is dangerous, therefore you may not do it”. Instead, God’s message in the Bible is “You can do whatever you like provided that you do not harm the person or property of someone else or violate my moral code”.

We have a wonderful God who actually allows people to sit on their own roof and make choices about what risks they will take.

~~~~~~~~~~

1. My reference books are very vague about the meaning of bloodguilt. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says “Ezek 18:13 seems to indicate that the phrase does not necessarily signify bloodshed, but any grievous sin, which if it remains, will block God’s favour to his land and people” . Make of that what you will. Deut 21:1-9 is perhaps more enlightening.

2. Note the self interest here: property owners built the railings in order to protect themselves, and other people benefited from the self interest of the property owners: in modern times insurance costs can regulate behaviour as fear of bloodguilt did in biblical times, without involving the state.

With biblical capitalism everyone benefits from self interest and there is no need for a Socialist/Marxist state to maintain social order and protect people from the supposedly predatory capitalists. E.g., the self interest of a trader who wants to keep his customers coming back (not to mention his fear of being beaten up if he’s found to have false weights) will cause him to use honest weights in his scales and his customers benefit from this. Self interest regulates behaviour to the benefit of others.

~~~~~~~~~~

Bethyada has written a guest post on MandM looking at why the Bible does not specifically address the issues that the sceptics demand that it addresses:

A not infrequent complaint raised by theism sceptics is that the Bible does not address many issues the sceptics think it should address

I am broadly in agreement with what Bethyada says but I’d like to add my ha’pennethworth.

First, three comments regarding these sceptics:

1. their arrogance in demanding that an author specifically address their concerns is breathtaking.
2. it is very rare to hear such criticisms of holy books other than the Bible, from which I conclude that this is a feeble antitheistic technique rather than a genuine search for truth.
3. they have rejected the abundant evidence of the existence of God that is all around them, and as a result they have become “futile in their speculations” (Rom 1:18-32, Eph 4:17-19). Would you trust the reasoning of such a mind? In my humble opinion that would be as daft as asking a two year old if it’s safe to cross the road.

So, why doesn’t the Bible address X? I have three responses to this:

1. God very specifically addresses that which is important to him (e.g. he forbids murder), but he leaves a bunch of grey areas in which it it possible to have a variety of beliefs and still be a christian. E.g. the bible is not specific about the eschatological time line (the order of events at the end of this present world, leading up to and following the return of Jesus), so there are a variety of beliefs about this. Unless your eschatological beliefs deny the deity of Jesus or involve some other apostasy you’ll still get into the Kingdom of God.
2. some things only become clear when God renews a christian’s mind (e.g. Rom 12:2). Thus a sceptic may think that the Bible does not address X, but that sceptic has an unregenerated mind that is futile in its speculations so may be incapable of seeing that the Bible does in fact address X.
3. God has not left us a deficient manual for godly living, instead he has left us one that contains everything we need for life and godliness:

His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. (2 Pet 1:3 NIV)

For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. (Rom 15:4 NASB)

A pagan’s failure to see Y in the Bible does not indicate the absence of Y.

~~~~~~~~~~

According to Charismamag Matthew Lincoln is suing Lakewind Church for US$2.5m, claiming that he was injured there after being slain in the spirit. Lincoln says that the church had a duty to ensure that someone caught him when he fell and failed to do so, therefore the church is responsible for the injuries that he received when his head hit the floor. Lincoln’s wife is suing for US$75,000 for “loss of consortium, loss of services and companionship of her husband”. Is that legalese for “I’m not getting any nooky now”?

So, what is “being slain in the spirit”? Basically, the pentecostals and charismatics believe that the Holy Spirit causes someone to fall down. Although God is capable of acting in this way, my personal belief – and observation – is that is what is seen in churches today is not from God and is entirely man-made. I cannot give a scriptural defence for this position because, as far as I know, the Bible does not specifically address it. However, the overall Biblical pattern is that those who came into direct contact with God and/or angels retained conscious control of their bodies, although they certainly did feel fear and probably felt weak at the knees!

Today we’ll look at two aspects of Lincoln’s law suit:

1. The merits of the case
2. The manner in which Lincoln has made his complaint

1:: The merits of the case

Looking the Chraisamag article, Lincoln had been going to Lakewind for a long time and someone had always caught him when he was slain in the spirit, but this did not happen on this occasion. Therefore he alleges that the pastors did not properly supervise the “catchers” and that the church board did not fulfil their duty. The implications of a court ruling supporting these allegations are horrifying: “Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to discuss the Risk Management Plan for Visitations of the Holy Spirit”. Let’s now look at an analogy applicable to Lincoln’s situation.

Imagine that you have a daily walk which includes crossing a bridge over a deep gorge; you have been walking this route for many years and can reasonably expect that the bridge will be there when you get to the gorge. However, the owner of the bridge has been neglecting the maintenance of the bridge and one night it collapses into the gorge. The next morning you’re strolling along as usual and daydreaming as is your habit. Then suddenly you step into thin air and wake from your daydream to find yourself at the bottom of the gorge and severely injured; your daydream is now a daymare. Has the owner of the bridge failed in his duty of care towards the users of the bridge? Certainly he has. Are you responsible for your injuries? Certainly you are. Why so? Because you failed to use your God-given faculties and thus didn’t notice that the bridge was no longer there.

On the other hand, if you had a contractual relationship with the bridge owner and the contract said “the bridge owner shall maintain the bridge so that I the undersigned can always safely walk over it whilst daydreaming and not observing my surroundings” then the bridge owner would be entirely responsible for your injuries because he was in breach of contract.

I believe the following:

1. Lincoln had a reasonable expectation of being caught, but no further inference can be made from this.
2. Lincoln did not have a contractual relationship with the church which required that he be caught and therefore the church is not culpable.
3. Lincoln was in control of his bodily actions and therefore was responsible for ensuring that someone was going to catch him. He failed to do so and therefore he is entirely responsible for his injuries.
4. Lincoln is attempting to impose a contractual relationship upon the church post facto via litigation.
5. Even if the church is responsible for Lincoln’s injuries – a notion that I reject – the church has not directly injured his wife, and therefore her claim is contrary to scripture because the personal injury laws of the Bible only require that compensation be made to the injured party, not to his wife, daughter, cat, and camel as well (e.g. Exodus 21).

Consider this: if I am wrong and the Holy Spirit was controlling Lincoln in such a way that he was not capable of ensuring that someone would catch him, why would the Spirit allow harm to come to Lincoln during what is supposedly a blessing from the Spirit?

2:: The manner in which Lincoln has made his complaint

Paul said to the christians in Corinth:

If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers! The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers. (1 Cor 6:1-8 NIV)

Lincoln has gone against the word of God by taking a matter between christians to a civil court, and even if he had a good case for compensation he should have forgone that compensation rather than going to a civil court. If Lincoln wanted to pursue this case he should have approached Lakewind Church in the first instance, then sought out a christian arbitrator if his approach was unsuccessful. If Lakewind Church was not willing to abide by the ruling of an arbitrator then Lincoln should have ceased all proceedings.

In my humble opinion Paul clearly believes that suing a fellow christian before unbelievers is bringing the Church and the name of God into disrepute: if you doubt that, try and imagine what the reaction would be if you told this story to a pagan friend. Lincoln has also bought shame and defeat upon himself by taking this case to a civil court.

Post a comment and share your thoughts on this situation.

~~~~~~~~~~

Here I have reproduced the entirety of a thought provoking post from Lew Rockwell and added emphasis. Post a comment had tell me what you think about having this sort of thing happen in church – the button for that is at the bottom right of the post.

A little cultural background is in order here. The cult of nationalism is rife in the USA: it is common to see flags flying outside houses, and kindergartens have graduation ceremonies where the children wave flags and sing patriotic songs. The Texas education laws require a daily religious ceremony wherein children pledge allegiance to the US and state flags, followed by a minute’s silence (click here for more on that). I read a book written by a US soldier who said that he thought the US President was good and close to infallible before he (the soldier) went to war. A country that has a sports “World Series” that for a long time had only US teams in it has a grossly inflated view of its own importance.

I believe that the US military actions in places such as Korea, Iraq, Vietnam and Afghanistan cannot be biblically justified. Ancient Israel waged aggressive war under divine mandate but, despite what Bush et al think, the USA does not have a divine mandate with which to wage aggressive war.

The USA is a Warfare State, i.e. the state constantly says that there is a crisis and uses this as a justification for the destruction of personal freedoms. The Cold War enemy went, then Saddam Hussein was the Big Bad Guy, and now there’s the so-called War on Terror: there’s always a war going on. New Zealand is no better, using Swine Flu as a reason for increasing the surveillance of citizens. The church described below is delivering the propaganda of the Warfare State and this is despicable at best.

During our recent ANZAC Day (the New Zealand equivalent of Memorial Day) I pondered the following question: “Is it good to remember those soldiers who died whilst attempting the enforce the illegitimate and immoral acts of the state?”. My conclusion was that those soldiers were sincerely deluded (i.e. they believed that they were defending our freedom, and in some cases they were actually doing so) so it was good to remember them. No disrespect is intended by this.

Although the authorities are appointed by God, the vast majority of the actions of those authorities are immoral, i.e. they go beyond what is biblically permissible for the state. E.g., provision of health care is not a permissible state activity, and those state leaders who levy taxes in order to pay for health care will suffer the consequences of their theft on judgement day. Those state leaders who engage in immoral aggressive warfare will answer to God for that warfare and for the theft that paid for it. Christians are instructed to obey the state, not worship it or its agents, and they should not condemn themselves by approving of the immoral actions of the state.

If you think that I’m being blunt wait until you read the post from Lew Rockwell…

This is how Joshua Joscelyn describes his visit to a church this morning that had a Memorial Day service. And this is a church where the pastor opposes the Iraq war. Read it on Facebook or below.

A peculiar thing happened in many American churches today. I, myself, was in one church where this very thing happened. One might not have expected such a thing to have happened in American churches, especially Baptist churches of the type to which I am accustomed. But it did. And it happened in gross detail and thoroughness, with the full support of the ministerial staff, deacons, ushers, musicians, and most of the members in general, if not all. The funny thing is that, because of the context and the occasion, no one thought twice about it. Perhaps if it were of a different nature, and with a different context, and on a different Sunday, the church would have been irate that such a thing would happen within their hallowed walls. But they weren’t. Because it was Memorial Day. And the thing that happened? Fornication.

That’s right. In thousands of churches today, spiritual fornication took place in rampant fashion, and with the backing of good men and women. It happened with the support and at the direction of good men of God – preachers of holiness, separation, and righteousness. But like their Jewish predecessors of the Old Testament, they substituted a false god for the one, true Jehovah. In the Old Testament, God gives His Ten Commandments to the children of Israel, and the very first commandment of all reads “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Ex. 20:3). But what did the children of Israel do? Well, some of the time, they worshipped Jehovah. But other times, they worshipped other gods. The prophet Jeremiah decried this worshipping of graven images and fashioned idols when he repeated the Lord’s words to him, “Hast thou seen that which backsliding Israel hath done? she is gone up…and there hath played the harlot…And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks” (Jer. 3:6,9). God uses very strong language to speak of Israel’s substituting other things for the worship of Him, likening Israel to a harlot and her actions to whoredom.

He even speaks of the prophets engaging in this practice (Jer. 23:14). In fact, one of the more famous examples of spiritual fornication was led by Aaron, the high priest, when the children of Israel worshipped the golden calf with their song and dance. These unfaithful devotees were no better than the temple prostitutes employed in the pagan rituals of their neighbors. The language of the Bible even indicates that some of Israel’s practices might have also included this literal practice of temple prostitution, as well. And the same parallel could be drawn in modern worship of the Lord Almighty, today. We have our own temple prostitution. It just goes by other names.

In the New Testament, Jesus repeated the commandment to love the Lord supremely to the exclusion of all others. And many Christians who believe they obey this commandment do not even realize the rank hypocrisy they are guilty of when sitting through a typical Memorial Day service. Perhaps this is because the service looks like a regular church service. Perhaps this is because the service sounds like a regular church service. And the fact is, in many ways, it is a regular church service – with one exception: the object of worship. Today, I had the misfortune of sitting through song after song praising the killing forces of the United States government, as if this were on par with worshipping God, the One who gave us life, salvation, and peace. But regardless of who the songs were about – military or no military – they weren’t about God! And I was in church! Worship was taking place, no doubt about it. Hands were raised, iconic memorabilia was displayed in prominent places, heads were occasionally bowed, standing ovations occurred, and who knows what else (I walked out mid-service). But the object of worship was not God – even though the sign out front said “Baptist Church.”

Now, some churches might water this down, and rather than directly worshipping the military or U.S. government, they “thank God for” the military. But the result is the same: the service is focused not on God, but on the object He is being “thanked” for. I’ll admit this latter mode is not as abhorrent to myself as is the former method, but I submit to you that God is still not pleased. He says “I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images” (Isa. 42:8). God makes it clear that He does not share His glory with anyone. “I will not give my glory to another” (Isa. 48:11). So how dare we, like the pagan, temple prostitutes, and the idolatrous backsliders of Israel, turn God’s church services, in God’s house, into services of praise and glory for the U.S. military?

The objection might be raised that we are merely thanking those who died in defense of our freedom, but that is not what I saw, nor have seen. Graphics of modern tools of empire were flashed on the screens, jets and tanks invading foreign lands in conquest were displayed, and standing ovations were given for troops who invaded unprovoked nations like North Korea, Viet Nam, and Iraq. But regardless, even if these pawns of empire had really died in our defense, keep the focus where it should be! Soldiers do not give us liberty, security, or peace – God does! And while it is not wrong to thank someone who defends you, it should not be the focus of an entire church service. This is setting up something in the place of God, and God calls it whoredom – prostitution.

Today, good churches who usually worship the one, true God, backslid. They took a vacation from praising Jesus. Instead, they set up a golden calf. “This time,” they said, “we will bow down to the idols fashioned by our very own hands.” And then they turned around, and in God’s house, they spent an hour praising the military and U.S. government – creatures of their own making. In Jeremiah 2:26, God points out the irony of Israel’s idolatry to stones and images they, themselves, created: “Saying to a stock, Thou art my father; and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth: for they have turned their back unto me, and not their face: but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise, and save us.” Likewise, God condemns the spiritual fornication of modern American Christians who bow down to the military and government, saying “They fight for our freedoms. They fight there, so we don’t have to fight here. If you’re free, thank a soldier.” How wrong they are. God is my provider – not the U.S government or their goons. And if you or your pastor engages in this spiritual fornication – becoming unfaithful to your first love, God Almighty – you are guilty of so much more than you may realize. Giving God’s glory to the military is a serious whoredom. You are a temple prostitute.

~~~~~~~~~~

When the Church is indistinguishable from the world around it those who are unhappy in that world have no reason to seek out the Church.

I am reminded of the fact that Charles Darwin is buried in Westminster Abbey. The Bride of the Lamb should not invite rapists into her home.

Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today…

Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace…

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world…

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one

The NZ Herald is reporting the Good Friday re enactment of the crucifixion of Jesus on Mangere Mountain in Auckland, New Zealand (map). This included the Stations of the Cross, whipping, and a crown of thorns. It appears that they didn’t put nails in his hands and feet or a spear is his side, and no earthquakes have been reported.

What do you think about this type of re enactment? Can you think of any relevant scriptures?

~~~~~~~~~~

The comments button is at the bottom right of this post.

The Daily Mail is reporting that two psychics/mediums/spiritualists have been given a £4,500 (NZ$10,900, US$6,500) business grant. Can you imagine a Catholic couple getting a grant for a business that taught clients how to pray for people in purgatory?

This is utter hypocrisy from a country where a Christian nurse is in trouble for offering prayer to a patient and was told that “you must demonstrate a personal and professional commitment to equality and diversity” (how the heck does one do that?). Note the use of the word “personal”: this nurse is effectively being told that she must follow the religion of equality and diversity irrespective of her own beliefs.

Why is this hypocrisy? It is hypocrisy because the nurse did not impose her beliefs upon anyone, whilst the state is forcing taxpayers to financially support the beliefs of these psychics.

As I have previously said, the Liberal Left permits anything except Christianity because Christianity is the root of Western culture and the Marxists intend to control that culture. Thus it’s fine to ignore the diversity of beliefs amongst taxpayers and force them to financially support the beliefs of mediums, but a nurse who offers prayer is failing to demonstrate a commitment to equality and diversity. It’s a splendid example of Marxist moral relativism.

Paul Rees, one of the mediums, said ‘They hadn’t invested in psychics before so we really had to prove ourselves.’ First, I dispute the use of the word ‘investment’. Second, did they have to ‘prove’ their business plan’s soundness or prove that they could contact the dead? Did they have to prove both?

Interesting trivia

Mediums and clairvoyants fall into two categories: those who receive satanic information, and those who make it up. The latter are almost certainly in breach of Section 16 of the Summary Offences Act, which appears under “Offences Resembling Forgery or Fraud” and says

Acting as medium with intent to deceive
(1) Every person is liable to a fine not exceeding $1,000 who, acting for reward,-

(a) With intent to deceive, purports to act as a spiritualistic medium or to exercise any powers of telepathy or clairvoyance or other similar powers; or

(b) Uses any fraudulent device in purporting to act as a spiritualistic medium or in purporting to exercise any such powers.

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person shall be deemed to act for reward if in respect of what he does any money is paid, or any valuable thing is given, whether to him or to any other person.

(3) Nothing in subsection (1) of this section shall apply to anything done solely for the purpose of entertainment.

What do you think about psychics being given taxpayer money and the NZ law regarding psychics?

***

What does the Bible say about necromancy (attempting to contact the dead) and clairvoyance/divination (predicting future events)? The message couldn’t be much clearer:

• ‘Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the LORD your God. Lev 19:31

• ‘As for the person who turns to mediums and to spiritists, to play the harlot after them, I will also set My face against that person and will cut him off from among his people. Lev 20:6

• Now a man or a woman who is a medium or a spiritist shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones, their bloodguiltiness is upon them.’” Lev 20:27

• ‘You shall not eat anything with the blood, nor practice divination or soothsaying. Lev 19:26

• “There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. “For whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD; and because of these detestable things the LORD your God will drive them out before you. Deut 18:10-12

• It happened that as we were going to the place of prayer, a slave-girl having a spirit of divination met us, who was bringing her masters much profit by fortune-telling. Following after Paul and us, she kept crying out, saying, “These men are bond-servants of the Most High God, who are proclaiming to you the way of salvation.” She continued doing this for many days. But Paul was greatly annoyed, and turned and said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her!” And it came out at that very moment. Acts 16:16-18

(All from the NASB)

~~~~~~~~~~

The BBC is reporting that Tim Kretschmer, a former pupil of Albertville-Realschule (secondary/high school) in Winnenden (near Stuttgart in south-western Germany), went to that school with a firearm and killed 12 people, then killed another 3 people outside the school before killing himself.

The BBC says that German Chancellor Angela Merkel described the shootings as “incomprehensible”. Are they really incomprehensible?

Not if you read Proverbs, which says

Doing wickedness is like sport to a fool¹
And so is wisdom to a man of understanding. [Pr 10:23 NASB]

This verse describes one of the symptoms or signs of foolishness¹. Killing other people is definitely wickedness, and there is almost certainly a sporting component for those males who run around shooting people. However, not all fools are killers, so what made Kretschmer and his ilk killers?

Creation Ministries International (formerly Answers In Genesis) presents a compelling case for an evolutionary basis for suicide-massacres, and shows the clear evolutionary beliefs of those who have committed school massacres and the committed suicide. This is from the CMI website in regard to the Columbine High School shootings:

In groping for answers to this and other tragedies, more and more people are expressing surprise and concern at the increasing glee with which many teenagers approach depictions of violence. However, this fixation with death is hardly surprising given that most public schools in Western nations now teach that violence and death are ‘natural’ evolutionary mechanisms that have operated with chance processes to produce man over millions of years.

Having been told since childhood that man is just an animal, that death and violence are a natural part of evolution, and that ‘only the fittest survive,’ it is no wonder that this generation of young people are wallowing in utter hopelessness. Even when they hear ‘Jesus loves you,’ many either do not understand what this can possibly mean in a ‘world of death and randomness,’ or it makes them more angry and bitter that such a beautiful possibility seems denied by the ‘facts’ of science. Many of these people are ‘walking time-bombs,’ without fear of any judgment after death, and primed to explode in anger and hatred at any time.

How can we Christians help defuse these ‘bombs’? Christ is indeed the answer, but in our ‘evolutionized’ society, reaching these young people requires that the church understands and utilizes the truth about our origins.

The true and accurate Genesis account of history enables young and old to understand why this is a groaning and violence-filled world-that death, bloodshed, disease, and suffering are a consequence of sin-but that God so loved the world that He provided His Son as a sacrifice for our sin. Our young people need to know that they are made in the image of God, are sinners separated from their Creator, but can be saved for eternity, and know purpose and meaning in life, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Source

Remember that evolutionary education does not excuse the actions of these killers, because God says that his creation (the world around us) makes his nature evident and therefore people who reject him are without excuse.

Remember also that suicide is an extreme act of self-love and selfishness, perhaps surpassed only by murder. Click here to read a biblical defence of that statement (PDF 448 Kb, go to page 13).

I strongly recommend that you read these articles:

• Inside the mind of a killer

• How to build a bomb in the public school system

• Suicide: What’s the problem?

It is probably too simplistic to say the teaching the theory of evolution to children causes school massacres, but it is true to say that an evolutionary world view permits the hedonism and brutality that is prominent in murder-suicides whilst also providing a justification for those actions². If you read the articles that I have linked to above you will see that evolutionary terminology is heavily used by these killers, and I suspect that they did this to provide some sort of excuse for doing what they knew was wrong.

It is always sad when a pagan dies. However, Romans 1 says that such people are without excuse and they are the architects of their own downfall, because they have chosen to reject God despite the fact that he has made his nature clear to everyone. Those who go into schools and kill others before killing themselves only have themselves to blame: they are not victims, as is commonly supposed.

What do you think about the points I have made here and those in the articles that I’ve linked to?

**********

1. foolishness is poor moral character: see Footnote 2 of my post A Biblical Perspective on Home Schooling and State Schooling

~~~~~~~~~~