Author: Robin Brown

What used to be a rather nerdy activity done by a few teenagers has now come to dominate culture.  Few adults have not encountered some sort of electronic game on their phones. 63 % of U.S. Adults play games, and the average age of a gamer is now 35. Not only are more people playing, and playing at later ages, people are playing for longer hours. In 2007, the average gamer who player World of Warcraft was playing for 17 hours a week – essentially a part time job.

The industry is now valued at around $100 billion. Companies such as Facebook and Google have invested billions of dollars into Virtual Reality, which is certain to overwhelm current gaming in the next 5-10 years.

What aspects of gaming are hostile to Christianity?

• Immaturity

Dr. Leonard Sax, in his book Boys Adrift, states, “The proportion of young men (age eighteen to thirty-five) living at home with parents or relatives has surged over the [last] thirty years. That proportion has roughly doubled, while the proportion of young women in the same age group living with parents or relatives has remained constant. Young women and young men are now following different life scripts. Young women are getting jobs, establishing themselves in the workplace, then (in many cases) thinking about having children. But a growing number of young men are just not on the same page.” 

Many young men are shunning adult responsibilities, including financial independence, marriage and family (but not sexual intimacy), a career path. There is instead a deliberate rejection of wisdom, a juvenile infatuation with  fun and selfish pursuits. “At some point the responsibilities of adulthood should make regular devotion to video games impossible.”

A near addiction to video games allows an immature person to wallow in substitute reality and responsibility: pretending one is an adventurer, a hero, or a conquerer, while in reality, the person lacks self-discipline, hard-work, sacrifice, and service.

• Substitute Reality

Stories and fantasy are helpful to the degree that they return us to our world improved, shaped and more rightly viewing reality.

To the degree that they simply show us the world-as-we’d-prefer-it, or some non-existent heroic form of ourselves, it is an exercise in flattery and self-deception. This is where we prefer the fantasy-world. It is the reality we enjoy more, we like ourselves more in that world, and is problems and challenges seem more compelling than the problems in the real world.  

The use of avatars encourage an obsession with ourselves in a fantasy-context, which may nurture more narcissism instead of love for others.

True stories exist of marriages that have broken up because a husband or wife was so obsessed with the alternate reality of gaming that the real-life marriage collapsed.

While playing the occasional game is harmless, a near-devotion to gaming can warp a Christian’s view of reality. At the very least, it can dull him to the realities that are pressing on us: Heaven, Hell, the Gospel, prayer, and our needy neighbours.

What are some of things we’d want to consider as we think on the place of computer games and virtual reality in the lives of a believer?

• Time and Eternity

Due to their computerized complexity, today’s video games often require days to master and weeks to beat. A game that costs only $40 or $50 to purchase may actually cost hundreds of hours in wasted time. In many games, the player’s character develops as he advances through the virtual story line and becomes more skilled and better equipped. Time invested in such pursuits is forever lost and cannot be reused for things that matter. Hours that could be spent working, praying, reading, serving, fellowshipping, evangelizing, or just thinking are instead spent on activities that have no lasting value. God’s Word teaches us that time is precious (Psalm 90:12; cf. 39:4-5). Using it wisely is an issue of good stewardship. We must not forget that our lives are not our own; we belong to Christ (1 Corinthians 6:20). When we waste time consistently, a few hours each day, we waste the very lives we have dedicated to Christ.

• Purity

It should be obvious, but games (no matter how popular) that glorify violence, denigrate the value of human life, promote greed, reward deceit, contain profanity, or flirt with sexual immorality should be avoided by believers (Proverbs 6:17; Ephesians 5:3; 1 Timothy 4:12). Our entertainment must honor the Lord and reflect His character. Our amusements should not reinforce values that are diametrically opposed to how we ought to think (Philippians 4:8) and what we are to do (Mark 12:30-31; 1 Corinthians 10:31).

Many games are rated “M” for mature. In one of the most popular games, Grand Theft Auto, where layers gain points as they murder, steal, deceive, covet, and solicit sexual favors, all while trying not to get caught. 

Does the content of the game encourage anything like Philippians 4:8, and Ephesians 5:3-8?

 

Adapted from Austin Duncan in MacArthur, John. Right Thinking in a World Gone Wrong: A Biblical Response to Today’s Most Controversial Issues.

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Biblical Principles Regarding Dress  (continued…)

2. Distinct Masculinity and Femininity

Deuteronomy 22:5 – “A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.” Egyptian or Canaanite culture apparently contained some form of perverse trangenderism. God forbade his people from wearing what would identify them with the opposite sex. 

First Corinthians 11 is Paul’s treatment of the topic of women wearing head-coverings. In Graeco-Roman culture, all women wore head-coverings, as is true in some cultures to this day. To appear in worship without one was, in that culture, an act of defiance – both against male headship in the church, but also against the created order. She was either doing the equivalent of appearing like a man, or appearing like someone immoral and without restraint.

In our context, fashions are increasingly unisex. This is not necessarily a problem, because one can still look  distinctively male or female by your overall appearance. But in a culture of transgenderism, the move is now to blur the lines as much as possible. Christians need to find ways within current clothing styles, to glory in biblical manhood and womanhood. Certain occasions particularly call for celebrating manhood and womanhood. In dressing our children, we should provide them with occasions to revel in being distinctively male or female.

3. Appropriateness for Occasions

As Christians are to be discerning about the meaning of all things (1 Thes 5:21), we should consider what our dress communicates. As a people who should be known for dignity and soberness, we should consider what belongs in what venue. What do we wear to a court case, and why? What do we wear to a wedding, and what do we wear to a funeral? What do we wear on a hike, and what do we wear to the beach? What do we wear to formal dinners? What does it mean to be casual, and what does it mean to be formal?

When it comes to church, simply ask yourself, what kind of occasion is this? What are we doing here? Is it a light-hearted event, or a serious one? What am I telling myself about the meaning of the Lord’s Day by how I dress, and what am I telling my neighbours?  

 

 

Discerning the Meaning of Changing Fashions

Holly Stratton: “As we address modesty, another difficulty comes with our differing perspectives on culture and on the varying degrees with which we allow it to influence our clothing choices. When the fashion industry introduces a style that is openly anti-biblical in the message it has been designed to send, it is typically rejected by those of us who are seeking to please God even when the style is modest. However, grave differences can be found in how quickly or slowly we eventually embrace the style since we possess not only varying perspectives as to when the initial messages of sinful intent have subsided but also varying perspectives about the identification the style continues to carry.

The designs of Coco Chanel, for example, illustrate our differences in this rejection and acceptance process. In the 1920’s, it was scandalous when Chanel removed the darts and waistlines from dresses that had given them a distinctly feminine form. Her introduction of a loose-hanging shift dress gave women a “boyish and masculine figure” that greatly disturbed conservatives. Though the initial intent of her shapeless garments caused rejection, eventually the free-flowing designs were embraced. (“Jumpers” evolved from this design.) Controversy continued to follow Chanel when she introduced women’s suits. Lapels, herringbone, glen plaid fabrics, and button-down and French-cuffed blouses found as much controversy as the trousers she included in her collections.”

The same is true of wire-rimmed glasses, bell-bottoms and flared pants. These lost their counter-culture rebellious meanings after the 70s.

Though godly wisdom may dictate our hanging onto bars of rejection when anti-biblical messages swirl around a particular design, godly love demands that we don’t kick at others who deem it acceptable to release their grip. Much damage can come when sinful judgment finds us establishing ourselves as the determining factor of when bars can righteously be released. There will always be rejection bars to which we should and must cling as we seek to honor and to obey God and to keep a clear conscience before Him, but we must do so humbly and graciously.

In spite of the challenges outlined in this article, a more important and poignant message is that the path of modesty is paved with the glorious Gospel of Christ. As the truth of His grace fills the heart of a Christian woman, she will develop a mind of sobriety that will find her setting “her affection on things above” (Col. 3:2). The more she is consumed with the fact that her nakedness has been covered with robes of righteousness, the more she will desire to physically clothe herself in a manner that will richly—and not skimpily—demonstrate that covering. As she grows in grace, she will begin to more fully understand that, as a redeemed child of God, her clothing represents more than a physical covering. She will develop a shamefaced attitude that comes from a heart that remains keenly aware that the shame of her sin was covered by the precious blood of her beloved Savior, a covering she was unable to procure for herself. A yearning to “conceal, not reveal” will grow within her heart as she gains deeper understanding of that marriage, a beautiful picture of the Gospel that has covered her sin, offering the one venue where her nakedness can be shamelessly exposed. This truth will drive her to joyfully preserve herself for a holy union she will cherish whether she is married or not.

When we face a sea of ill-clad women in our world, do our hearts compassionately yearn to share the news of the Gospel? I must sadly admit that instead of that response, I too often find myself mumbling sarcastic phrases of frustration under my breath. Does the immodesty that surrounds us fill our hearts with a passion to humbly offer instruction in righteousness and to lovingly disciple others toward Christ-likeness? Are we faithfully modeling before our daughters the garments of grace that will stir their minds to be soberly set upon Him? May each day find us voraciously feasting on the Word of God and diligently attending to the slightest prompting of the Holy Spirit so that, in spite of human limitations and difficulties, graceful modesty reigns within our hearts and our homes.

Carolyn Mahaney: Questions to Ask

1. What statement do my clothes make about my heart?
2. In choosing what clothes to wear today, whose attention do I desire and whose approval do I crave? Am I seeking to please God or impress others? 
3. Is what I wear consistent with biblical values of modesty, self-control and respectable apparel, or does my dress reveal an inordinate identification and fascination with sinful cultural values?
4. Who am I trying to identify with through my dress? Is the Word of God my standard or is it the latest fashion?
5. Have I solicited the evaluation of other godly individuals regarding my wardrobe?
6. Does my clothing reveal an allegiance to the gospel or is there any contradiction between my profession of faith and my practice of godliness?

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Clothing is notoriously associated with legalism, and rules. “Not more than three fingers above the knee, three fingers below the neckline” “No pants”. The reaction to stringent rules about clothing and dress codes has produced an unfortunate backlash which dresses rebelliously, or thoughtlessly. The motto today becomes “God looks at the heart, not the clothes”.

But we have to consider why churches concerned with holiness have been prone to make rules. The younger generation assumes it is because they were legalists and hated freedom. They seem to miss the fact that when fashions are rapidly changing, it’s natural to try to make a standard of modesty practical by spelling things out in detail.

 

The problem is not making rules. Every responsible parent is going to teach children modesty, and going to get down to brass tacks – “too short, too form-fitting, too loose”. If it is not sinful for a parent to say so, it is not sinful, in principle, for a Christian to say so to another Christian in a discipleship relationship.

The real problem is twofold. One, fashions change, and the meaning of the fashions changes with it. Like music, there are aspects of meaning which are intrinsic to the human body, and aspects of meaning that are culturally formed. Revealing certain parts of your body is going to be sexually provocative for all people of all times. On the other hand, certain cultures place different meanings on things such as pants, certain colours, shorts etc.

The second problem is binding Christian’s consciences in areas where an amount of differing choice is allowed. There can be certain contexts where a mandatory dress code is enforced (a Christian school, for example), but in the church, the norm has to be teaching principles, and helping the less mature through direct discipleship.

Instead, Christians need to understand the biblical principles.

Biblical Principles Regarding Dress

1. Modesty. Modesty is much more than how much thigh or cleavage is revealed. Modesty begins with the desire to be moderate in one’s appearance before others.  “How does a woman discern the sometimes fine line between proper dress and dressing to be the center of attention? The answer starts in the intent of the heart. A woman should examine her motives and goals for the way she dresses. Is her intent to show the grace and beauty of womanhood? Is it to reveal a humble heart devoted to worshiping God? Or is it to call attention to herself and flaunt her beauty? Or worse, to attempt to lure men sexually? A woman who focuses on worshiping God will consider carefully how she is dressed, because her heart will dictate her wardrobe and appearance.” -John MacArthur.

 

 

Consider the descriptions of the character of modesty:

• 1 Tim 2:9-10

Notice the words: modest apparel = kosmiois “respectable” “in accordance with decency”; with propriety = aidous “reverent, unpretentious, respectful shyness, reserve, reticence”; and moderation = sophrosunys “self-controlled, reasonable, of sound judgement”.

The contrast: “not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing” (1 Tim. 2:9). Is Paul forbidding braided hair, jewelry or expensive clothes? No. The contrast is between unpretentious and pretentious, between reserved and flamboyant, between respect of others and thrusting oneself forward to the the centre of attention.

Practically: this looks like service and teachability.  “...but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. 11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission.” (1 Tim. 2:10-11)

Another contrast: Proverbs 7:5-12. Notice she is “loud and rebellious” “her feet do not abide at home”. Notice then her clothing outwardly represents the state of her heart.

• 1 Peter 3:3-4

The adornment is not to be merely external. The adornment begins within. What inner adornment befits the greatest women of the faith according to verse 5?

A gentle (praus) spirit = mild, gentle; quiet (hesuchios) spirit = tranquil, at rest, not unruly.

Modesty of the heart, then, is going to be worked out into what is worn, and when.

There is a clear distinction between dressing for beauty, and dressing for sexual attraction. One adorns your person, and brings attention to your face. Another invites prurient glances at your body for sexual thoughts. One adds elegance and beauty, another advertises one’s body. One encourages others to consider you as a person, another encourages them to notice your sexuality.

Matthew 5 condemns lust in the mind as a form of adultery. It is possible for a man to lust after a woman even if she is covered from head to toe. It is also possible for a man to resist lusting after a very provocatively  dressed woman (and he should). But once we have agreed that onlookers have a moral responsibility to be pure in thoughts, do we not also have a loving responsibility to help onlookers to do so? Is it loving to your neighbor to make it easier to lust, or harder to resist doing so? This goes back to the inner qualities of modesty.

At some point, this does come down to whether something is too short, too low, too thin, too form fitting, too tight, or too loose.

This applies to the swimming pool and beach, too. Certainly swimming requires we wear less, but should Christians, when swimming in a public venue or mixed company, wear what leaves almost nothing to the imagination? Why is wearing lingerie in public okay if we make it waterproof and call it a bikini?

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Particular Sins With Food … (continued)

4. Legalism

“In the nineteenth century there were prominent liberal and sectarian theologians who believed that the sinfulness of man could be curbed through diet and hygiene. John Harvey Kellogg, a Seventh-Day Adventist, invented corn flakes as a meatless breakfast food designed to reduce the sexual drive. Control of ‘bestial sexual impulses’ was linked in the popular imagination, both sectarian and liberal, with a bland diet devoid of alcohol, coffee, tea, tobacco, condiments, and largely devoid of meat. Assumption of this diet would reduce what is today called libido, and this reduction of the ‘animal’ in man would be passed on to one’s children, who would grow up with less ‘original sin.’ Salvation through diet passed into the popular imagination through the writings of liberals like Horace Bushnell, sectarians like Kellogg and Charles Finney, and cultists like Mary Baker Eddy. As a result there is a pervasive orientation toward dietetic theology in American Christianity that colors our discussion of the Sinaitic dietary laws.” Wilson, Douglas. Confessions of a Food Catholic (pp. 25-26). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.

One’s standing with God or spirituality does not hinge on whether one does or does not eat certain foods.

Colossians 2:16-17, 20-21 – “Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ …. If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!”

5. Perfectionism & Idolatry

“Even among Christians, it is common to see people fretting constantly about the levels of toxicity in their bodies courtesy of Certain Corporations (fear), the fattening effects of that entirely unnecessary cheesecake they had at lunch (shame), and the fact that the coffee beans for their mocha were picked by an underpaid laborer in the third world (guilt).” Wilson, Douglas. Confessions of a Food Catholic (p. 34). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.

When fear, guilt, and shame dominate every meal, idolatry is present.

Doug Wilson: “Christians who feel guilt over their decisions of what to eat need to go to sleep on the roof, like Peter did, so that they might see the entire inventory of General Mills lowered in a sheet from heaven. If your food is your guilty pleasure, or if your parsimonious disapproval of others is your guilty pleasure, then it is time to bring your kitchen (and all the cupboards therein) to the feet of Christ. ” 

1 Timothy 4:1 – “Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, 3 forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”

6. Financial Foolishness

“Paying three times as much for a really good apple is a fine thing to do, so long as you know that you are doing it. But if you think that you are a humble creature of the soil because you are whooping it up on luxuries is one of the oddest things that I have ever seen in my life.” Wilson, Douglas. Confessions of a Food Catholic (p. 22). Canon Press. Kindle Edition.

Shouldn’t Christians Prefer Natural or Organic Foods?

The problem with the word natural is that it is never clearly defined. Most food requires the use of some artifice to get it into an edible state. Another great example is petroleum. There’s a natural product for you—right out of the ground, from the bosom of mother nature. Boil it off and you get sugars, and then flavor chemists can tinker with it and get you some stupendous flavorings. Now suppose we have defined natural, and defined the limited number of steps to keep a product natural. We have determined that this particular product falls within that stipulated definition. Poisonous mushrooms can fit within the definition, and almond-flavored petroleum sugars won’t.

All of creation is now cursed. Now this means that we cannot point to anything in the created order and justify its use in a particular way simply on the basis of its being “natural.” Nor can we reject anything on the basis of it having been “processed.” The creation around us is a damaged good, and this means that when we point to a particular aspect of it, we are not yet clear whether we are pointing to an aboriginal good, or to one of the defects introduced by the Fall.

So those Christians who use “natural” and “organic” as terms of praise, and who eschew the use of “chemicals” in food preparation are failing at three places. First, as I have noted, they are not applying the doctrine of the Fall. They are not capable of finding any food in this world that has an unfallen nature, for which natural would work as a term of unqualified praise. Second, they are not able to find a food anywhere that is not made out of chemicals. Chemical-free food would a sight to behold, and a miracle in its own right. And third, they are giving weight, and moral weight, at that, to standards that have little to do with objective value and much to do with marketing.

 

 

What about Boycotts? Should we Support Animal Cruelty/ Bad Practices?

The question of supporting or boycotting practices that are present in the larger economy is difficult to answer, because it is impossible to be consistent, except where evildoers are known to you.

May I drive on highways that go over property that were seized unjustly by eminent domain? May I buy an automobile when the carburetor was manufactured by slave labor in mainland China? How about the carburetor and the distributor cap? May I buy petrol from a joint that has three racks of porn behind the counter? May I buy books from a company that has a soft porn division? May I buy unit trusts that include corporate farms and plantations in the portfolio?

Does buying meat from the shambles in Corinth (1 Cor. 10:25) help provide an income stream for the idolatrous temple services? Sure it does, but who is worried about it? Not God! God has other ways of affecting their income stream (Acts 19:24–27). Buy their meat, but not their silver figurines.

If we know our neighbour is harming animals (Prov 12:10), we can deal with that – by reporting him, exposing his cruelty, or not buying from him. But accounts of farms far away made by socialists like Michael Moore really should not move us.

With regard to any claim that matters enough that we need to check it , the Bible teaches that we look for external corroboration , internal consistency , and a clear willingness for the claim to be falsified. “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established” – 2 Cor. 13:1. “ But neither so did their witness agree together” –Mark 14:59. “He that is first in his own cause seemeth just ; But his neighbour cometh and searcheth him” – Prov 18:17. Consequently, the big concern that I have about many believers going in big for foodie concerns, or those with treatments for designer allergies, or exotic treatments for various ailments, is not the proposed treatment itself. The issue is the nature of knowledge, not the nature of the stuff in the world . If oils made from pine needles were able to do marvelous things , there would be no one happier than I . But if no one is allowed to ask any judicious questions , then you may depend upon it — a scam is being run.

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Given the amount of space given to the topic in Scripture, eating can be a major source of spiritual stumbling or growth. Assorted sins surround an abuse of food, as do opportunities to do well.

Broad Biblical Principles Regarding Food

1. Foods are not equal. Some meals are better than others: in quality, in health benefits, and in taste. As a general rule, healthy eating is a good thing. But this is a spiritual issue only in terms of stewardship and general wisdom. It is not a case of spiritual defilement.
2. God is primarily concerned with what our hearts love and choose, than what we swallow. Rom 14:17, Heb 13:9.
3. The true defilement of any food has to do with what the human heart thinks about it and how it uses it, not what the substance itself is (Mark 7:15-19).  “The sin is never in the food because Jesus declared all foods clean. The sin is always in the sinner. This means that we can sin with our food but we cannot sin by food.” Wilson, Douglas. Confessions of a Food Catholic (p. 32). Canon Press. Kindle Edition. 
4. Jesus declared all foods clean in Mark 7:18-19 -” ‘Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?’ (Thus He declared all foods clean.)” 
5. Every food can be sanctified by receiving it with thanksgiving. 1 Timothy 4:3-4 – “… men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with gratitude.” Eating is a gift from God to be enjoyed both as a means of nourishment and as a pleasure.
6. A concern for God’s glory should govern our eating habits. 1 Corinthians 10:31 – “Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”

 

Particular Sins With Food

1. Gluttony

Proverbs 23:20-21 – “Do not be with heavy drinkers of wine, or with gluttonous eaters of meat; for the heavy drinker and the glutton will come to poverty…”

Titus 1:12-13 – “One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith …”

Ecclesiastes 10:17 – “Blessed are you, O land, whose king is of nobility and whose princes eat at the appropriate time—for strength and not for drunkenness.”

2. Anorexia & Bulimia

The  binge behavior of bulimia falls under the same condemnation as gluttony. Proverbs 25:16 – “Have you found honey? Eat only what you need, that you not have it in excess and vomit it.”

 

 

3. Pride (Mark 7:2)

Frowning upon the spirituality and morality of another for food choices is simply pride. Religious disapproval of food without clear disapproval from God is a species of pride. When different preferences turn into judgement of wrongdoing, we have crossed a line. e.g. eating foods with preservatives, foods with refined sugar, genetically modified foods, foods farmed by food corporations, foods with carcinogens, high fat, MSG, Aspartame.

While genuine allergies are a painful cross to bear, some Christians place their personal health over the importance of table fellowship with other Christians. Some allergies are very serious immediately , while others should be filed under certain foods “ not agreeing with ” your constitution . There are food allergies , with varying degrees of seriousness , and there is food intolerance, with varying degrees of seriousness . The law of love should govern in all instances. Hosts should be thoughtful hosts , and guests should be thoughtful guests. 

Charity towards another’s food scruples is necessary. At the same time, we need to reject, and reject with godly vehemence, every attempt to bind the consciences of the saints with regard to what they may eat (Col. 2:20–23). We defer to the weaker brothers at lunch, which is not the same thing as letting them teach on this.

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Drugs

Drugs were an integral part of many ancient Near East societies. For example, the pagan cultures surrounding the nation of Israel used drugs as part of their religious ceremonies. Both the OT and New Testament condemn sorcery and witchcraft. In those days, drug use was associated with sorcery (the word translated “sorcery” comes from the Greek word from which we get the English words pharmacy and pharmaceutical). A witch or shaman prepared drugs. They used drugs to induce an altered state of consciousness that allowed demons to take over the mind of the user. In our day, many use drugs merely for so-called recreational purposes, but we cannot discount the occult connection.

Galatians 5:19-21 says: The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery, idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissentions, factions, and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

The word witchcraft (pharmakeia) here is also translated “sorcery” and refers to the use of drugs. The Apostle Paul calls witchcraft associated with drug use a sin. The non-medical use of drugs is considered one of the acts of a sinful nature. Using drugs, whether to “get a high” or to tap into the occult, is one of the acts of a sinful nature where users demonstrate their depraved and carnal nature.

The psychological and potentially demonic effects of drug abuse should not be discounted. A questionnaire sent to marijuana users documented some disturbing findings. One-fourth of those who responded reported that they were taken over and controlled by an evil person or power during their drug-induced experience. And over half of those questioned said they have experienced religious or “spiritual” sensations in which they met spiritual beings.

Further, drugs like marijuana, cocaine and crack are illegal substances. The use, possession and sale of these drugs is against the law. Law-abiding citizens should not participate in the use of illegal drugs.

 

Adapted from Brad Anderson

 

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Strong Drink

Twenty-two times the Bible uses the word “strong drink,” which comes from a root meaning “to drink deeply,” or “to be drunken.” Strong drink refers to intoxicating drink of any sort not made from grapes. Various concoctions made from pomegranates, apples, dates, barley, etc. were known to the ancients and must have been used in Palestine also. Isaiah denounces those that “rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink; that continue until night, till wine inflame them!” (Isa 5:11). He expresses his contempt for the priest and the prophet who “have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way” (Isa 28:7). Isaiah assails the “greedy dogs” who say, “I will fetch wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and to morrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant.” (Isa 52:12-13). Most of the alcoholic drinks of our society today would be considered “strong drink” by biblical standards because of their high alcohol content. Many modern wines have been strengthened (fortified) to increase their alcohol content and thus contain more alcohol than the wines of biblical times would have, especially once mixed with water.

Strong drink presents a danger, but it is not uniformly condemned in the Bible. A clear statement giving permission for the drinking of wine and even strong drink is found in Deuteronomy 14:26: “And thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household.”

Should Christians Drink Alcohol?

1. The abuse of alcohol is clearly sinful. One should never get drunk.
2. On the other hand, one must admit that several texts of Scripture seem to allow for and even commend the use of wine and/or strong drink (Deut 14:26; Ps 104:14-15; Prov 3:9-10; Ecc 9:7; Joel 3:18). Wine and strong drink are not evil in and of themselves. They do not cause drunkenness just as the presence of food is not the cause of gluttony. All sin proceeds from the sinful heart of man, not from part of the created order. The general tenor of biblical teaching is that wine, like any good gift from God, is easily abused: in this case, abuse involves addiction and drunkenness.

This leads to two possible positions:

Moderationism – Some Christians feel they have the right to enjoy alcohol in moderation. They argue that the Bible condemns the abuse of alcohol (drunkenness) but not the moderate enjoyment of it. We must admit that the Bible does not absolutely prohibit the consumption of alcohol for the believer.

Abstentionism – Some Christians feel to avoid all of the serious problems associated with alcohol, the best policy when it comes to wine, beer and other alcoholic drinks is total abstinence. If one wants to live a holy, righteous, blameless lifestyle, abstinence from alcohol is a wise commitment to make. Refraining is not a biblical mandate but a choice to avoid the dangers, compromises and associations that alcohol represents. Drinking may be lawful, but it is not profitable (cf. 1 Cor 6:12). For one’s own sake and for the sake of others, the best practice is to abstain from alcohol use.

• South Africa is an alcoholic culture. Drunkenness and the accompanying tragedies are common. In biblical times, drunkenness was not a major problem, especially in Jewish society. Drinking wine was more common but did not present much of a problem for most people.
• For those in Christian leadership, it is wiser. We are to avoid even the appearance of evil, to avoid tripping up weaker believers, and strive to be a godly testimony in a wicked culture. Because alcohol use and abuse is so closely tied with many sins, voluntary abstinence is the best policy for those who want to be above reproach.
• If you began your Christian life in abstinence, there is no reason to change and experiment with moderationism (1 Cor 7:20). On the other hand, the moderationist must keep evaluating if his use of recreational alcohol is being kept in a safe and prudent place in his life.

Questions to Ask Oneself

1. Is there a danger that a drinker may be brought into bondage? (I Cor 6:12) Alcohol has a capacity to influence and control even strong believers. Those who abstain can never be enslaved by alcohol. Not drinking avoids the the risk of becoming addicted to alcohol. The risk of a casual drinker becoming a problem drinker is significant—one drinker in ten becomes an alcoholic. Abstainers do not run the risk of becoming alcoholic, but moderationists do. Every alcoholic drank moderately at some point.
2. Not everything lawful is helpful (1 Cor 6:12). Ask: Are you fleeing temptation by doing this? (2 Tim 2:22) Does it make provision for the flesh? (Rom 13:14) Could Satan exploit this for evil ends? (Eph 4:27). Can you do it in faith (Ro 14:23)?
3. Will it lead oneself or others to stumble or sin (1 Cor 8:10-11)? While you may have the drinking under control, are you certain that everyone who observes you has? The ex-alcoholic, whose conscience is teetering between total abstinence, and plunging back into alcoholism, may take your drinking as permission, and be destroyed. Only absolute certainty about another Christian’s background and convictions could give you the knowledge to be charitable to him and drink or not drink in his presence.
4. Will it confuse an unbeliever’s understanding of the Gospel? Paul tells us that one kind of eating and drinking in the presence of unbelievers is permissible, but should the unbeliever associate your action with his unbelieving life, you should abstain for the sake of his conscience (1 Cor 10:27-28). 
5. Does drinking associate one with sinful elements of culture? Does it have the appearance of evil (I Thes 5:22)? Alcohol use is often associated in modern western culture with all manner of immoral conduct, and alcohol abuse is responsible for immense destruction, disease and death. Christians should not affiliate themselves with such corruption.
6. Will drinking harm one’s Christian testimony? One should not imbibe if doing so besmirches his reputation in the church or in the community. Does it adorn the Gospel? (Tis 2:10)
7. With refrigeration, a plethora of  non-alcoholic choices at hand today, the moderationist must ask himself what he seeks in alcoholic beverages. Is alcohol use necessary for one’s enjoyment and relaxation? (Eph 5:18) If one’s joy flows from a bottle, or if he needs alcohol to relax, he cannot claim to be merely a recreational user. If you are a moderationist, and are facing period of high stress, anxiety. People drink today because they want to, not because they need to.

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Why “recreational alcohol”? Simply because the Bible recognises other uses for alcohol or narcotics.

It had medicinal uses (1 Timothy 5:23). It is described as an antiseptic (Luke 10:34). It was used not only to disinfect wounds, but to sterilise water.  It was used as an opiate for the terminally ill (Prov 31:6). The matter under dispute is whether alcohol or drugs should be used merely for pleasure, as  recreational drinks or substances.

The Bible has a great deal to say about alcohol, the most common and most abused drug. Some Christians tend to either regard drinking as normal, and are surprised that some Christians do not drink at all; others they abstain completely and are shocked that there are Christians who drink.

Scriptural Principles

1. Christians are not to be drunk with wine (Eph. 5:18).
2. Drunkenness is a sin (Deut 21:20-21; Amos 6:1; 1 Cor 6:9-10; Gal 5:19-20).
3. At least three groups in Israel were forbidden from, or advised against drinking alcohol:priests (Lev 10:9-10), kings (Prov 31:4-5), Nazarites (Nu 6:2-3).
4. The Bible also warns of the many dangers of drinking alcohol (Prov 20:1; Isaiah 5:11; Hab 2:15-16). Perhaps the most vivid biblical description of inebriation is found in Proverbs 23:29-35. The writer depicts the drunk as experiencing woe, sorrow, wounds and bloodshot eyes. Drunken people “behold strange women” and “utter perverse things.” Although the experience is like being sick or physically beaten, alcohol has such a hold on the drunkard that he seeks to indulge again as soon as he wakes from his stupor. A wise person will avoid wine because at the end it “bites like a serpent and stings like an adder.” Solomon advises his readers not to spend time among poverty-stricken, raggedy “winebibbers.” Perhaps the most well known warning about alcohol abuse asserts that “wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.” (Prov 20:1). The Bible conclusively condemns the abuse of alcohol.

What about the word “wine” in the Bible? 

The word “wine” occurs about 230 times in the Bible. The word can refer to fermented wine or to fresh grape juice containing little or no alcohol. The alcoholic content must be determined by the context in which one finds the word. The fact that wine is often used in a context of getting drunk (or making merry) indicates that in general the word “wine” refers to an alcoholic beverage. Even “new” or “sweet” wine had the power to cause intoxication (Hos 4:11; Acts 2:13).

Was Bible wine fermented?

Since the process of distillation was not discovered until the ninth century AD, any alcoholic beverage mentioned in Scripture would be so by natural fermentation. Ancient people were able to prevent fermentation through various processes, but most people did not bother. Freshly squeezed grape juice (called must or mustum) was often available and was a popular drink in Bible times. But generally speaking, wine was fermented.

In Bible times wine was usually served mixed with water. Common mixture of wine with water was in ratios of 20:1 down to 3:1, which reduced the alcohol to less than 2%. There are references to this mixing of water with wine in several historical sources (2 Maccabees 15:39, Homer 20:1, Pliny 8:1, Clement (Instructor 2.2), Cyprian Epist 62.2.11). While the goal in the ancient world was to reduce the alcoholic content of beverages, the modern world has sought ways to increase it. Standard table wines have as much as 14% alcohol due to the addition of extra yeast and the control of the heat generated by the fermentation process.

They mixed wine with water because pure wine was almost like syrup after being stored and fermented for very long. Also, water was scarce and often impure. One easy way to purify water was to mix it with wine because the alcohol in the wine killed the germs in the water. It was considered barbaric to drink wine unmixed with water. It often took a great deal of drinking to get drunk because the alcohol content of wine was so low (around 22 glasses would have been needed).

Alcohol is the result of sugar decomposing (i.e., fermenting). Refrigeration was not available in biblical times, making the preservation of fresh juice a difficult project.  Jesus himself was accused of being a “glutton and a drunkard,” literally “one given to wine” (Luke 7:34). It’s clear that the Corinthians were using fermented wine when they celebrated (inappropriately) the Lord’s Supper because they were getting drunk (1 Cor 11:21). Thus, biblical wine, for the most part, was fermented and was capable of causing intoxication.

 

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Who is Responsible for Education? … continued

Some evidence exists in the Bible for community-based education. In New Testament times, higher education was available at a “house of study.” Such a school was attached to the Jerusalem Temple, and it was perhaps here that Jesus was found when twelve years old (Luke 2:41–52). Jesus would have gone to a house of the book at Nazareth when he was about six years old, sitting as part of a semicircle on the floor, facing the teacher. The only textbook was the Old Testament (2 Timothy 3:15). The traditional law was taught from the age of ten to the age of fifteen, and Jewish law beyond that. The brightest of the boys could go to Jerusalem to one of the law schools. Paul apparently participated in such training. He states that he had been brought up “at the feet of Gamaliel,” a respected Rabbi in Jerusalem, where he was taught “the law of the fathers” (Acts 22:3).

A version of this in our context may look like: a church-organised educational co-operative, where the children of church members (or others who are known and admitted) gather to supplement their homeschool, Christian school or public school education. Co-ops are the seed-form for thoroughly Christian schools operating out of churches.

The leaders within the local church are responsible for the education of the membership. Our Lord’s parting command was that his disciples evangelize the world and teach believers (Matt 28:19-20). One of the central activities of any church is teaching (Acts 2:42). One of the specific qualifications for a pastor is being “apt to teach” (1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:9). Mature believers ought to teach those new to the faith (Titus 2:1-3), and some will eventually mature to become teachers for the next generation (2 Tim 2:2; Heb 5:12).

Of course, the primary curriculum in a church context is the Bible. But the study of Scripture provides a foundation for the study of every academic discipline and a guide to every area of life. Many topics of interest relate to the Christian life, so the teaching at church should be broad enough to encompass a wide variety of subjects.

Formal education in a university, college or tech school provides information and skills required for success on many levels. Instruction in the humanities (history, art, politics, language, philosophy, etc) is helpful in developing well-rounded, thoughtful, informed citizens.

Educational Methodology

The Bible is not an education textbook, but it does give us some helpful examples showing us how to teach  effectively. Some biblical methods: Verbal instruction/lecture, Small groups, Mentoring/apprenticeship, Question and answer, Stories, Historic events, Sermons, Songs/poems.

Curriculum Guidelines/Requirements: A Christian worldview demands that the Bible be a central emphasis in education. Flowing out of this, Christian education focuses on five things:

1. Knowledge, understanding, wisdom
2. Languages
3. History  – the flow of world history and Christian history.
4. The arts
5. Logic and reason

Prohibited: On the other end of the spectrum, a Christian worldview demands that a student should not be exposed to certain kinds of information. The Bible tells us to “have no fellowship with unfruitful works of darkness” (Eph 5:11-12). We are to avoid and be ignorant of sinful, corrupt practices and ideas. We are to be wise concerning what is good and innocent regarding evil (Rom 16:19). Things like profanity, erotic realism, sexual perversion, lurid violence, occultism, and anti-Christian philosophies should be excluded from the educational process, especially for children.

However, the Bible does not candy-coat reality. Teachers must protect the innocence of younger students and deal with some topics only with older students.

 

Adapted from Brad Anderson

 

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa

Biblical Principles Relating to Education

The Purpose of Education from a Christian Perspective

Education has a strong spiritual component. It is not all about getting a good job and making safe choices in life. A God-honoring education will motivate the student to worship God with his heart, mind, soul and strength (Mk 12:30). A truly Christian education recognizes that “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding” (Pr 9:10).

1. The highest purpose for mankind in general is to “glorify God and enjoy him forever” (Ps 73:24-26; John 17:22-24; Rom 11:36; 1 Cor 10:31). Thus, the highest purpose in education must be to assist individuals in developing the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that will enable them to better glorify and enjoy God.  Christian education is not moralism added to secular knowledge.
2. Christian education is the pursuit of wisdom. Wisdom is the skill to understand knowledge gained from God’s world, and to apply it for God’s glory. When you are wise, you see life from God’s perspective, and turn those perspectives into practical obedience. A life of holiness – the life of a disciple – follows from a heart of wisdom.
3. Christian education aims at nothing less than giving children a thoroughly Christian worldview. A worldview is not one window for your mind to look out from. Your worldview is the lens through which you see everything. Worldview is how you understand the past, the present, and the future. Worldview is your standard of judgement: what is good, true and beautiful. Worldview defines God, others, the world, and yourself. Worldview is your idea of reality, your understanding of what is real. Not satisfied with teaching poetry, literature, geography, biology, history or business economics lightly seasoned with Bible verses, it insists that every domain of knowledge be understood as God sees it, and used as God commands it. This means that Christian education has a uniquely Christian epistemology. That is, Christian education believes a right way of knowing exists, and pursues this.
4. Another primary purpose is to instill within the student the desire to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt 19:19). Christian education is not primarily preparation for a career.  Thus, students should be equipped to serve others. Christian education promotes using knowledge to glorify God and to minister to others. Students should learn to obey and serve God more fully so that they may minister to others more effectively. Christian education desires to shape disciples, not merely equip careerists. Nevertheless, Christian education cares that its scholars fulfil their callings. First Corinthians 7:18-23 teaches that every Christian has a calling, or vocation. God appoints these stations in life, and fulfilment comes in pursuing and accomplishing one’s callings. Joy, as Ecclesiastes shows, lies not in sheer financial gain, but in God-ordained work. Eating and drinking, and enjoying the fruit of one’s labour, is not the world’s idea of ‘having a job’ and ‘getting paid’. Christian education hopes to prepare its learners to pursue their callings. In modern life, this means Christian education equips its students to be ready to pursue further training. Christian education does not attempt to provide specialised career training, but it gives a Christian excellent tools to do so. This will mean that Christian education should create careful readers, good writers, skilled researchers, and incisive thinkers. They will understand the technologies and  media around them, but more importantly, they will have a Christian understanding of how those should be used. They will understand the market, the politics, the cultural values of the world into which they will be sent as ambassadors of Christ.

Paul repeatedly warns believers that they are in a battle zone fighting a spiritual war (Eph 6:10-17). Much of this battle is fought on an intellectual level. Believers must cast down everything that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and to bring every thought into the captivity of Christ (2 Cor 10:4-5). A rigorous education is required for those who desire to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3) against skeptics and critics. God calls upon believers to develop their minds for the purpose of intellectual warfare, and the educational process provides an essential mechanism to assist in this task.

 

Who is Responsible for Education?

Every individual is ultimately responsible to God for his own continuing education. God expects every believer to actively seek wisdom (Prov 24:1-4). One of the key characteristics that distinguishes a wise person from a fool is his willingness to pursue wisdom and receive instruction (Prov 1:22, 9:7-10, 15:15). God’s most direct instruction to the individual comes explicitly though the Bible. Experience—the “school of hard knocks”—is also a good instructor. God expects us to learn from both.

Parents, and particularly fathers, are responsible for the education of their children. God gives parents the task of teaching their children (Deut 4:9, 6:7-8, 11:19; Prov 22:6). The responsibility of children to obey and honor their parents (Ex 20:12; Eph 6:1-2) implies that the home will be a place of education. The Bible tells parents that they have a moral responsibility before God to bring up their children in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Eph 6:4). As teachers labor to nurture, instruct, and discipline students, their central task is to make disciples of Christ.

Homeschooling is one application of this principle. However, homeschooling requires enough financial resources for one parent (usually the mother) to stay at home and teach. It requires significant investments of time, money as well as being demanding. Its drawbacks include missing some of the organised events that go with schools – extra-murals, and some of the opportunities to learn and apply social skills.

The Bible nowhere requires that the government be in charge of education. However, several individuals in the Bible likely experienced state-sponsored education (e.g., Moses, Isaiah, Daniel and his friends). We cannot claim that it is anti-biblical for the government to administrate the education of its citizens. A well-educated citizenry is certainly in the best interests of the nation, and without state resources, many citizens would not be educated. The Bible nowhere prohibits governmental sponsorship or control of education, unless such control interferes with parental desires or with biblical expectations. Unfortunately, modern state-run education often conflicts with both.

 

 

  – David De Bruyn, Professor of Church History, Shepherds’ Seminary Africa