Home » Posts tagged 'social issues' (Page 2)
Tag Archives: social issues
Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte by Richard Whately & Skepticism
Have you ever read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte by ? (view the book online for free here or here; a version you can cut and paste into a document so you can listen to it is here), or get a physical copy:
David Hume, the famous skeptic, employed a variety of skeptical arguments against the Bible, the Lord Jesus Christ, and against the possibility of miracles and the rationality of believing in them in Section 10, “Of Miracles,” of Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Whately, an Anglican who believed in the Bible, in miracles, and in Christ and His resurrection, turned Hume’s skeptical arguments against themselves. Whately’s “satiric Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Bonaparte (1819), … show[ed] that the same methods used to cast doubt on [Biblical] miracles would also leave the existence of Napoleon open to question.” Whately’s book is a short and humerous demonstration that Hume’s hyper-skepticism would not only “prove” that Christ did not do any miracles or rise from the dead, but that Napoleon, who was still alive at the time, did not exist or engage in the Napoleonic wars. Hume’s argument against miracles is still extremely influential–indeed, as the teaching sessions mentioned in my last Friday’s post indicated, the main argument today against the resurrection of Christ is not a specific alternative theory such as the stolen-body, hallucination, or swoon theory, but the argument that miracles are impossible, so, therefore, Christ did not rise–Hume’s argument lives on, although it does not deserve to do so, as the critiques of Hume’s argument on my website demonstrate. For these reasons, the quick and fun read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte is well worth a read. (As a side note, the spelling “Buonaparte” by the author, instead of Bonaparte, is deliberate–the British “used the foreign sounding ‘Buonaparte’ to undermine his legitimacy as a French ruler. … On St Helena, when the British refused to acknowledge the defeated Emperor’s imperial rights, they insisted everyone call him ‘General Buonaparte.'”
Contemporary Significance
Part of the contemporary significance of Richard Whately’s Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte relates to how we evaluate historical data. We should avoid both the undue skepticism of David Hume and also undue credulity. Whatever God revealed in His Word can, and must, be accepted without question. But outside of Scripture, when evaluating historical arguments, we should employ Biblical principles such as the following:
Have the best arguments both for and against the matter in question been carefully examined?
Is the argument logical?
Are there conflicts of interest in those promoting the argument?
Does the argument produce extraordinary evidence for its extraordinary claims?
Does the argument require me to think more highly of myself than I ought to think?
Is looking into the argument redeeming the time?
Are Biblical patterns of authority followed by those spreading the argument?
(principles are reproduced from my website here, and are also discussed here.)
A failure to properly employ consistent criteria to the evaluation of evidence undermines the case for Scripture. For example, Assyrian records provide as strong a confirmation as one could expect for Hezekiah’s miraculous deliverance from the hand of Assyria by Jehovah’s slaying 185,000 Assyrian soldiers (2 Kings 19). However, Assyrian annals are extremely biased ancient propaganda. Those today who claim that any source showing bias (say, against former President Trump, or against conservative Republicans–of which there are many) should be automatically rejected out of hand would have to deny, if they were consistent, that Assyrian records provide a glorious confirmation of the Biblical miracle. Likewise, Matthew records that the guards at Christ’s tomb claimed that the Lord’s body was stolen as they slept (Matthew 28). Matthew, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, intends the reader to be able to see through this biased and false argument to recognize the fact that non-Christians were making it actually provides confirmation for the resurrection of Christ. (If you do not see how it confirms the resurrection, think about it for a while.)
Many claims made today, whether that the population of the USA would catastrophically decline as tens of millions would die from the COVID vaccine, that Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams had her election win in Georgia stolen by Republicans, that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump had his 2020 election win in Georgia stolen by Democrats, that 9/11 was perpetrated by US intelligence agencies, that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election, that the miracle cure for cancer has been discovered but is being suppressed by Big Pharma, and many other such claims are rarely advanced by those who follow the Biblical principles listed above for evaluating information. Furthermore, the (dubious) method of argumentation for such claims, if applied to the very strong archaeological evidence for the Bible, would very frequently undermine it, or, indeed, frequently undermine the possibility of any historical investigation at all and destroy the field of historical research.
In conclusion, I would encourage you to read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte, and, as you read it, think about what Scripture teaches about how one evaluates historical information.
–TDR
-The Amazon link above is an affiliate link. Please visit here to learn about how one can donate to charity at no additional cost when purchasing products at Amazon and here to learn how to save on Internet purchases in general.
Christianity: Pro-Racism, Pro-Slavery White Man’s Religion–Reject it for Atheism!
I have written a pamphlet dealing with attacks upon the Bible and Christianity from its (alleged) racism and (alleged) support of chattel slavery, compared with the (alleged) anti-racism and anti-slavery position of atheism. It deals with the objection that “Christianity is the racist white man’s religion” and, as the Freedom From Religion Foundation claims, “[W]hite supremacy [is] interwoven with Christianity … inextricably intertwined.” (Sources for all quotes are in the pamphlet.)
Click here to read the pamphlet Biblical Christianity vs. Atheism on Racism and Slavery
You may think that such claims are so ridiculous that they do not deserve a refutation. You are correct about them being ridiculous—and, as Bethel Baptist Church, where I serve the Lord, is not majority white now and has not been for a very long time, reflecting the ethnic diversity of the area, it is indeed a very foolish claim. However, sadly, in secular college campuses and in liberal media these egregious falsehoods are regularly propounded. Not that long ago a very angry black man at a place where I was passing out gospel literature said that all white Christians were supporters of white nationalism. (He also said, ironically, that they all denied it when he said that to them. Hmm… ). He said he had a degree in religious studies. (Perhaps they should give him his money back.) In any case, the attack on Christianity from its alleged racism and pro-slavery position is very much out there.
The pamphlet demonstrates that:
1.) The Bible rejects racism.
2.) Christian churches in Bible times rejected racism—for example, the church at Antioch had a leader in the category of “prophet and teacher” whose name was “Simon the Black” and another born in Africa, while the rest were all from Asia; an African whose family became close to the Apostle Paul helped Christ carry His cross; etc.
3.) Christian churches and the wider realm of Christendom were profoundly impacted by Africa. Did you ever think about the fact that possibly the two most influential people in the history of Western Christendom were from Africa—namely, Tertullian and Augustine? Furthermore, the ancient Anabaptist movements, the Novatians and Donatists, were both led by African Anabaptists. Did you know that the Baptists were the first group of churches in the American South to come out against slavery?
4.) Christianity very rapidly spread from Israel to Africa to China to India to Britain.
5.) Ancient paganism was pro-slavery while Christianity was pro-slave (since it taught that “All Lives Matter,” and therefore the lives of slaves, people of darker and lighter skin, etc. all matter), and Christian influence, unique among world religions, led to the abolition of slavery.
6.) Modern racism actually stems from the Enlightenment and its rejection of Biblical Christianity, combined with the anti-creation philosophy of biological evolution. (This fact should be taught in all public schools, and at the very least every student in Christian schools needs to know this. Did you know it?)
7.) Slavery exists today in atheist countries such as North Korea and China, in accordance with the racism of people like Karl Marx, Charles Darwin, Hegel, and David Hume. Everyone should know that Darwin anticipated genocide by whites of “lower races”:
“The … Caucasian races have beaten … [others] in the struggle for existence. … [At] no very distant date … the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world.”
Everyone should know Marx said:
“Let us … speak of the beautiful side … of the slavery of the blacks in the East, in Brazil, in the Southern States of North America. … [S]lavery is an economic category of the highest importance. Without slavery … you would have … the complete decadence of modern commerce and civilization. … [S]ave slavery … [c]onserve the good side of this economic category.”
8.) The pamphlet then explains how spiritual slavery is the worst problem people suffer today. It illustrates that the root causes of racism (pride) and slavery (covetousness) are sins that the reader has been guilty of, and how, through the ransom payment of Christ, they can become spiritually free from the control of the sins that lead to racism and slavery now and eternal hell fire in eternity.
I would suggest reading the pamphlet yourself, keeping the link or a few copies on hand for people who run into this objection when preaching the gospel. I would also suggest that Christian schools, in history class, when they teach the Enlightenment and the impact of evolution and its pre-and post-Darwinian influence in the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries, make sure students know that modern racism came from these movements. Missionaries in Africa, the Caribbean, and, frankly, on most of the globe should know these things and share them with those to whom they minister.
Cancel culture should cancel Darwin, cancel Marx, cancel Biblical skepticism, cancel evolution, cancel atheism, and cancel agnosticism.
Everyone should recognize Christianity is the best friend of those who are against racism and slavery.
Click here to read the pamphlet Biblical Christianity vs. Atheism on Racism and Slavery
–TDR
Charles Darwin on Design in Creation
The Bible teaches that all men know God’s nature and power from creation, but they suppress that knowledge, leaving them without excuse. “All men” includes Charles Darwin, the incredibly influential promoter of the theory of evolution.
Scripture says:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. (Romans 1:18-23)
Is there evidence in Darwin’s life that his study of the creation pointed the evolutionist to the Creator? In a conversation between the Duke of Argyll and Charles Darwin, in the last year of Darwin’s life, the Duke recounted:
In the course of [our] conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the “Fertilization of Orchids,” and upon “The Earthworms,” and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature—I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin’s answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away.” (Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, ed. Francis Darwin, vol. 1, letter to W. Graham, July 3, 1881 (London: John Murray, 1887), 316.
In public schools, when they teach Darwinian evolution, they should tell impressionable young people that in Charles Darwin’s studies “often,” “with overwhelming force,” the reality that the intricate design of creation is “impossible” to explain except as “the effect and the expression of Mind” struck the author of The Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection and The Descent of Man. This statement from Darwin should be pounded into them the way they pound atheism and socialism into them.
I’m not holding my breath.
You can share his sentiments, however, with those who believe that Darwinian evolution explains away the need for the Almighty Creator. They ought to know.
Learn more about God, science, and the Bible by clicking here.
–TDR
Conspiracy Theory: Biblical Methods of Evaluation, part 4 of 7
Part four of this series is now at the link below. This post originally covered from the sentence: “Does the conspiracy theory produce extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims?” to the sentence: “We cannot disprove the possibility that tiny green elephants float and dance waltzes on Jupiter’s moons, while using advanced technology to avoid detection by humans, but the person who asserts that the green elephants are doing this needs to positively prove his assertion before we can rationally believe it.”
–TDR
Conspiracy Theory: Biblical Methods of Evaluation, 1 of 7
Part one of this series is now at the link below. This post originally covered from the beginning of the article to the sentence: “If we have adopted and are going to share a conspiratorial belief with someone else, we need to have answered these questions ourselves and be ready to explain our answers to the person whom we seek to convince.”
–TDR
The Church of Christ: Preach the Word of God, Preach Politics, or Preach Conspiracies?
Preach the Word or Politics?
In 2 Timothy 4:2, the Bible commands: “Preach the Word,” referring to the “all Scripture” of 3:16 with the Greek anaphoric article on the “the” of 2 Timothy 4:2. God commands His Word to be preached, and nothing else, in the church of Jesus Christ. Does this exclude preaching on political topics?
Sometimes preaching the Word means preaching what the Word says about politics. For example, the Bible condemns abortion and sodomy, teaches free market economics and a limited government instead of socialism or communism and an intrusive government, and favors republican government over monarchy or dictatorship. It is entirely appropriate to preach what Scripture teaches on these and related issues and to make appropriate contemporary application, whether through following what 2 Timothy 3:15-4:2 implies–expositional preaching through entire books of the Bible–or through topical messages on Biblical issues.
Do we see preaching on contemporary politics taking place in the New Testament? Matthew 14:1-4 reads:
1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, 2 And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him. 3 For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife. 4 For John said unto him, It is not lawful for thee to have her.
The first Baptist preacher made the clearly true, unquestionably verifiable statement that Herod should not have taken his brother’s wife. We have no other political statements at all from him, and it does not even appear that the Baptist declared the unlawful incest of Herod in a sermon–rather, John “said unto [Herod]” directly what the ruler had unlawfully done, also reproving Herod for all the evils he had done (Luke 3:19). So John made a clear Biblical application of a political matter in a personal way to the ruler in question.
What about the Lord Jesus? Christ called Herod a “fox” (Luke 13:32). This also was not in a sermon but in response to a question the Lord was asked. In every recorded sermon the Lord preached, and in all His teaching in the NT, there was nothing about the terrible political things going on in His day—which He could have used His omniscience to describe and warn about with perfect accuracy—but Christ did warn a great deal about false religion, the worst thing that was taking place in first century Palestine (and the worst thing happening in our day).
The sermons in Acts contain nothing about the dirty power plays in the Roman empire or other political events. The closest one gets is Paul proving that he was not a lawbreaker in court settings. Paul also used his rights as a Roman citizen (Acts 16:37; Acts 22), so Christians should use the voting rights they have in free nations.
So we have one statement from John the Baptist, made directly to Herod and not in a sermon, one word, “fox,” from Christ on politics, here again not in a sermon, and nothing in the apostolic preaching in Acts. Paul used the political right he had to protect his life and advance the gospel (Acts 22), and also used his citizenship to protect the Philippian jailer and his household from their heroic, selfless, and extremely dangerous act of taking Paul out of prison into the jailer’s home (Acts 16:37).
What about the New Testament epistles? In the epistles, there are no warnings about current politics at all.
So is it lawful to make application to current political events in sermons? Based on what Christ and the first Baptist practiced, it is certainly lawful. However, it is also certainly not the emphasis of the New Testament. The balance found in the NT epistles is to spend 99% of the time on giving people God’s unsearchable truth; when naming evil men and evil deeds to focus on religious corruption; and occasionally as a legitimate application of Scripture to point out the evil in the secular political world. Indeed, God’s infallible truth, powerfully preached, will do far more long-term good, even politically, than changing God’s pulpit into a place of political commentary.
A congregation where people did not know that the Democrat party overwhelmingly opposes religious liberty and promotes abortion and sodomy would be poorly informed. Application of the Sixth Commandment would properly inform people of the indisputable facts right in the Democrat party platform. However, a congregation that does not know what the books of Zechariah or Ephesians are about (for example), but hears all sorts of things about contemporary politics from the pulpit, is also not following the New Testament balance. They should hear far more in the Lord’s house about the Joseph of Genesis than about Joe Biden.
It is true that the Old Testament prophets spoke more about the misdeeds of their rulers and of other nations than one finds in the New Testament. This fact should encourage us to be gracious rather than judging harshly that contemporary politics are alluded to too often by other pastors or other preachers. However, we should also keep in mind that Israel was a theocratic nation-state–a political nation among other political nations. The king was not just a ruler, but one with a religious position over God’s people. The surrounding nations were not just people groups, but idolatrous enemies trying to destroy the kingdom of God on earth and stop the coming of the Messiah and the consummation of God’s redemptive program by wiping out Israel. It may therefore be a better comparison if we consider Jeremiah warning the king to submit to Babylon as comparable to the harsh and specific NT warnings against false religion rather than the equivalent of someone preaching about the misdeeds of secular political rulers.
Furthermore, speech about political rulers must follow Romans 13:
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. (Romans 13:7)
John the Baptist said nothing disrespectful to Herod. Even Michael the Archangel did not rail harshly against Satan, who indubitably deserved it (Jude 9). Even if a secular political ruler is very evil–as most of them are–and very hostile to Christianity–as many of them are–we must show them fear and honor in the same way that we must give them tribute or pay taxes–God requires it.
So preaching legitimate applications of Scripture on politics is right, but making politics central to the church is not, nor should the church follow politically conservative heathen in their reviling of those with liberal political views. Respect is required for all men, and especially for all rulers, even if they personally do not deserve it in the least. Remember that you don’t deserve respect in and of yourself, either. You deserve hell fire, but God gave you grace despite your unworthiness. He calls you to show respect in the same way to unworthy political leaders who He has ordained (Romans 13) for His own ultimate glory and wise purposes.
Preach the Word or Conspiratorial Politics?
What about political conspiracy theories? I have already addressed this to an extent in my posts “Satanic Conspiracy, COVID-19, and the Church’s Response.” (My thoughts on the COVID vaccine specifically are here, with some broader comments on medicine here.)
Notice that what John the Baptist said about Herod was 100% true, credible, and unquestionably verifiable. Herod had taken his brother’s wife and was openly living with her. The same holds true for the Old Testament prophets. The Moabites had certainly burned the bones of the king of Edom into lime (Amos 2:1). (Since the New Testament epistles do not deal with any political controversies, they contain no examples here at all, but their silence does still teach us something about proportion, as already noted.)
Contrast that with, say, the dangerous semi-religious cult, the QAnon conspiracy, which believes various political leaders in the USA are engaged in pedophilia and Trump was going to expose them and send them to Guantanamo Bay, and made many other false predictions coupled with unfalsifiable affirmations. Is there a deep state cabal of pedophiles, or whatever other conspiratorial affirmation? Before someone believes something of this sort on a personal level, he needs to make sure that he has carefully weighed the evidence, not just for such a conspiracy, but against it (Proverbs 18:17) lest he answer a matter before hearing the evidence properly, which is folly and shame (Proverbs 18:13). If, for example, QAnon is really a movement of Satanic slander, as many born-again Christians affirm, then affirming its truth would be displeasing to the Lord. Consider the principles in the post “Shame, Folly, and Conspiracy Theories.” Do my affirmations in favor of the conspiracy meet Biblical standards of evidence? Certainly conspiracies should not be promoted in the pulpit in Christ’s churches unless they really have extraordinary evidence for their extraordinary assertions. It was easy to verify that Herod had an unlawful spouse. He did not deny who his consort was. It is much harder to prove that a particular person engaged in abominable acts with minors when nobody allegedly involved says it happened, there is no forensic evidence, etc., and nobody seems to care about it except some extremely fringe social media people who have very dubious evidence to back up their expansive claims.
Let us imagine that someone at one’s workplace told a lie one time out of every twenty statements that he made. We would consider such a person to have a severe lying problem. While conspiracy theories actually have a truth value that is far closer to 0% than to 95%, let’s imagine that a preacher starts preaching political conspiracy theories and is actually correct 95% of the time. He would still be breaking the Ten Commandments 5% of the time—a grave lying problem. “Thou shalt not bear false witness” does not have any exception for discussions of politics. It does not have a 5% exception. Slander is a grave sin, even if one is slandering a political leader with a terribly anti-Biblical worldview. Slander is still a grave sin, even if one is slandering someone as verifiably crooked as Hillary Clinton. If she is crooked in one way you are not lying to say it, but if you accuse her of something she did not do it is slander. Yep, it is still a sin to slander even her.
Preacher, let’s be much harsher on ourselves than on others as we evaluate these things, and make sure our own sermons are 100% accurate, respectful, and non-slanderous. Nevertheless, whoever makes an inaccurate statement, even if he is convinced it is true by slick-sounding misinformation and is sincerely beguiled by enticing words (Colossians 2:4), is still breaking the Ninth Commandment. We are not to engage in such behavior ourselves, because the devil is the father of lies (John 8:44). We are not to tolerate it in our houses, because “he that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house: he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight” (Psalm 101:7). We must not bring it into Christ’s church, because that is the place to preach the infallible truth of the Word (2 Timothy 4:2) as the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15), not the place to preach what is either verifiably false, or even only possibly true but uncertain, or even what is true but is not exposition and application of the Bible.
So preach the Word—not politics. Follow the pattern of the New Testament in how much politics is talked about in church. It is not 0%, but not that far away. It is very far from the emphasis. Following the New Testament pattern both honors Christ, the One who told the church what to preach, and also promotes liberty in the long-term in a far more effective way than an unbiblical lack of balance that turns the Lord’s church into a Super PAC.
So preach the Word—not conspiratorial politics, because preaching a conspiracy, unless it is absolute truth, risks committing the grave sin of slander in the place where only what has an infallible “thus saith the Lord” should be proclaimed, for that alone gives glory to Jesus Christ, the great Head of His church.
–TDR
Fight Google’s Censorship!
Is Google still your default search engine? If so, you are helping an anti-Bible, anti-morality, pro-sodomy, pro-perversion, anti-God company with every search you make. They also intend to censor you and to eliminate your voice if they can. For example, if you search for “Homosexuality is wicked,” the top result (as of when I wrote this article) is an article that laughably claims that sodomy is not condemned by Scripture, and other pro-sodomy articles are in the top page of results. If you search on the search engine DuckDuckGo, the top result is an article entitled “Five Biblical Reasons Homosexuality is Worse than Most Other Sins” and practically every other article on the first page is anti-sodomy, with the anti-sodomy articles being stronger against this perversion than the ones on Google. Do you really think that the top results on Google are unbiased, or is Google putting a heavy thumb on the scale? If you search for “scientific creationism” on DuckDuckGo, the first page includes links to the Institute for Creation Research and Answers in Genesis. Neither website is on the first page in a Google search. Do you think that is by chance? If you search for “Hunter Biden China collusion,” the top result on DuckDuckGo is an article from the leading conservative organization National Review entitled “A Collusion Trail: China and the Bidens.” On Google, National Review does not appear anywhere on page one and this article is at the very bottom of page 2. Chance? Oh, no!
DuckDuckGo is not specifically conservative–it just doesn’t have the leftist bias of Google. DuckDuckGo just puts up what most people actually are searching for when they do Internet searches. While some interaction with wicked companies is unavoidable, breaking your tie with Google here is easy. Open your “preferences” file in the browser(s) you use right now (it may be some dots in the top right corner of your browser, or it may be in a menu) and change the default search engine from Google to DuckDuckGo. Do it on your phone. Do it on your laptop. Do it on everything. Google wants your data to make money, but it doesn’t want your beliefs. It wants to destroy them. Stop giving Google money with your Internet searches, and resist Google’s censorship of God’s truth. It takes about five minutes. Do it now.
–TDR
Tithe on Investment Gains!
As of the day I am writing this post (4/19/21), the flagship Eventide Gilead Fund, a leading fund in the Eventide family of Biblically-based, Christian mutual funds, is up an incredible 90.97% in the last 12 months. The Eventide Healthcare and Life Sciences Fund is up 65.5% in the last year, and the new Eventide Exponential Technology Fund is up 67.78% since inception. (Past performance is not a guarantee of future results, we know.) It is not very easy to tithe, say, week by week on investment gains, but it would be appropriate to do it once a year, if not more, perhaps analyzing end-of-year statements.
Some people may be used to tithing on income from their employment but just do nothing with investment gains (and losses). This is not Biblical. If your IRA or other investment vehicle now has $190,000 in it when a year ago it had $100,000, you have gotten $90,000 in “increase” (-1.7% for yearly inflation, so actually $88,000 in real gain) and you are to “tithe” on your “increase” (Deut 14:22, 28; 26:12; 2 Chr 31:5)–and do so cheerfully and with thanks to the Lord who has blessed you, not just tithe on your weekly or bi-weekly employment income. (The reverse would also hold true for investment losses.)
Don’t withhold the firstfruits that belong to the Lord, but make sure that in this year of very strong gains in the financial markets you honor the Giver of all good things with at least 10%, if not much more, since we are not under the law, but under grace.
–TDR
Why I Got Vaccinated for COVID
I believe Scripture does not directly address whether someone should be vaccinated against COVID or not. Within a church people should have liberty to follow their conscience. I made the decision to get vaccinated. Here are the reasons why. Please consider them respectfully. If you agree, that is great. If you disagree, that does not mean you do not love the Lord Jesus Christ, and I hope we can respectfully and rationally discuss our reasons, and we can still “receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God,” and still “with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 15:6-7).
1.) I got vaccinated because vaccines have saved millions of lives. Compare, for example, David Cloud’s articles on life before and after typhoid vaccines, smallpox vaccines, and yellow fever vaccines. God tells man to subdue the earth and have dominion over it (Genesis 1), and the scientific method and science are part of the way that we obey that command. I got vaccinated because I believe I am helping to stop a disease that has killed or contributed to the death of millions of people world-wide, and in this way am loving my neighbor as myself.
2.) I got vaccinated because I believe it helps to save the health and lives of the Lord’s people in His churches. I know of good churches where people have died from COVID. I know of numbers of the Lord’s saints who were hospitalized because of COVID. I know of numbers of the Lord’s people that had to go on oxygen because of COVID. Some of them were elderly, but others were young. By way of contrast, I don’t know anyone who has died of the flu or had to go on oxygen because of the flu. And these are just people I am familiar with–there are countless numbers of the saints of Christ in other places who have likewise gotten sick, been hospitalized, or died. I want to do what I can to help God’s saints be able to serve the Lord Jesus Christ on earth for as long as possible until He comes.
3.) I got vaccinated because even if one does not get hospitalized or die from COVID, it is not a fun disease to have for many people. Some people I know who got COVID months ago still have issues with their sense of smell now and have other problems. When they were sick it was not a good time for them. I would rather not risk getting really sick and having ongoing effects possibly a long time later when I could just get a poke in my arm and go about my day just like normal. My only side affect was a slightly sore arm for a short time. Also, I am much less likely to have to lose several weeks of income quarantined, and much less likely to cause other people and businesses to have to lose their livelihoods for several weeks, and I would like to prevent those things from happening.
4.) I got vaccinated so that I can have greater ministry to the elderly. I would like to be able to go into a nursing home to preach the gospel, not limit my opportunities to go into an elderly person’s home to preach the gospel door-to-door, pick elderly people up for church, and so on.
5.) I got vaccinated so that I do not give people a reason to stay away from the Lord’s house on the Lord’s Day. They don’t need to be afraid that I am going to make them sick. I also do not want to give weak people a reason to stumble. I would much rather get a little poke in my arm than hang a millstone around my neck and be cast into the sea (Mark 9:42), but it is better to have that bad situation with a millstone than cause others to stumble.
6.) I got vaccinated so that if I have opportunities to preach or teach the Word in other countries my ministry will not be limited by being unvaccinated and unable to get into the country.
7.) I got vaccinated to defend religious liberty. Religious liberty is increasingly under fire, especially from the left in the USA. Many restrictions on churches meeting at all were very bad, and they were justified by the threat of the spread of disease. I believe I am taking away this excuse to attack Christ’s churches and restrict them and their worship and their ministry. If the majority–which always has been and always will be unregenerate (Luke 12:32)–thinks of churches as places where anti-vax conspiracy people spread disease all over the place, they will want to shut them down. If they don’t like churches because of the gospel we preach, that is fine. If they don’t like us because we are taking a “stand” for something not in the Bible, like opposing vaccination, that is not good. Assembling, as Christ commanded, to worship the Triune God, is something worth fighting for and dying for. I do not believe opposing vaccination is worth fighting or dying for. (I also believe supporting vaccination is not a doctrinal issue and should not cause division in a church.)
8.) I got vaccinated because I believe it will help our church to be able to minister to everyone in the community, not just people who subscribe to certain conspiracies or hold certain unconventional views on science.
9.) I got vaccinated because it can help with evangelism. If I am at a public transit station passing out gospel tracts to thousands of people, they might be afraid to take one from me if I am unvaccinated, or I might give them an excuse not to take one. Furthermore, I am more likely to get sick by being out with very large groups of people, and I want to be able to minister without increasing my risk of infecting others.
10.) I got vaccinated because I do not want my unvaccinated brethren in Christ, or other fellow humans in God’s image, to get sick. If a high enough percentage of the population gets vaccinated, COVID will be unable to spread as effectively, and those who do not get vaccinated will also be safe. If not enough people get vaccinated, while the vaccinated people will be protected, those who are unvaccinated will remain vulnerable. I would like to help protect those vulnerable people.
11.) I got vaccinated because, while none of us knows the future, it is very possible that this virus will keep mutating so even people who have gotten COVID already may get it again in a year or so. There are churches that have very few vaccinated people, and where for a variety of reasons they either neglect or refuse to social distance, mask, etc. COVID has gone through many such congregations, sickening many, hospitalizing some, and killing a few. At least for now if practically everyone has already gotten sick, though, they have antibodies just as if they had been vaccinated. If this is a once-for-a-lifetime situation, it would still be very sad for precious saints of the Lord to be in an untimely grave, or on oxygen for weeks, teetering on the brink of death or life, with many others unable to smell or taste properly for months. Unfortunately, COVID may become a yearly thing like the flu. It would be terrible for churches to have COVID sweep through every year and hospitalize or pick off a few of God’s sheep every year. By getting vaccinated, and getting a follow up in future years if necessary, I can do what I can to prevent a recurrence of serious and sometimes deadly sickness among the Lord’s people.
12.) I got vaccinated because I believe it fits in with the real world that God made, which is not the imaginary world of conspiracy theories from InfoWars and its kidnapped children who are in slave labor on Mars, or lies spread by countries such as Russia that are spreading vaccine disinformation. I don’t want God’s Word and His infallible truth associated with such things, or for people to associate the Bible or Christianity with such false ideas or with a failure to be able to think logically and rationally, when Scripture strongly favors a “sound mind” and commands, “come, let us reason” (2 Timothy 1:7; Isaiah 1:18). Of course, not everyone who has not received a COVID vaccine is a follower of InfoWars or accepts Russian disinformation. People may have many reasons for not getting vaccinated which may be better than these ones—for example, if a person already had COVID and was treated with monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma, in conjunction with his doctor’s advice it may be good to wait a few months before getting vaccinated. If a husband forbids his wife from getting vaccinated, then she should not get vaccinated. But if InfoWars or another highly unreliable Internet source is why we are not getting the vaccine, it might be wise to reconsider that reason, at least.
13.) I got vaccinated to honor my father and my mother. My family is helping to care for an elderly parent who has not yet believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. This person does not believe in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. I do not want this loved one to get sick because of me, hindering my ability to share the gospel, or even worse, pass into an eternity without Christ, because I did not get vaccinated. I also do not want my ability to witness to this loved one hindered by adopting anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and having this person think that the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ–which is overwhelming–is like the evidence for anti-vax conspiracies, which is, at best, far from overwhelming.
14.) I got vaccinated because after carefully considering them I did not believe arguments against vaccination are as strong as the arguments for getting vaccinated. The best anti-COVID vaccine argument is that one is supporting abortion by getting a COVID vaccine. However, I do not believe getting vaccinated supports abortion or is anti-life. No COVID vaccine has tissue from any aborted children. It is true that in the 1970s and 1980s cell lines from abortions were placed into labs and used for medical testing. We are now thousands and thousands of generations of cells away from this originally wicked act of getting the cells in this way. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine has more involvement with abortion than Moderna or Pfizer, so I avoided the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, although I do not condemn those who got the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. I am not killing any preborn children by getting vaccinated, nor am I supporting the way decades ago a particular cell line was originated by getting a vaccine that is made thousands of generations of cells later when there are no other alternatives. I believe I am very pro-life if I make it so that the lives of the very real people I know who have died from COVID are the end of the death from this disease. Pro-life means I try to stop the unnecessary death of adults as well as those of the preborn. Non-Christian religious pro-life movements such as Catholicism as well as secular pro-life groups also recognize the morality of getting a COVID vaccine, even while they (as I agree) recognize it would be better to get cell lines that originated in a different way. If a treatment for a deadly and dangerous disease was achieved by experimentation on the corpse of an adult person who had been murdered, and there were no other equally effective alternative treatments, I would get the treatment for the disease while advocating for other methods of research and development and trying to eliminate future murders in every righteous way possible. I will do the same in this situation. If you think that there is too much of a connection to abortion to get vaccinated, I respect your concern and don’t want you to violate your conscience. From the way I see, it, however, we probably have a closer connection to abortion if we ever shop at a grocery store that donates to pro-abortion causes and if we pay taxes–as Romans 13 commands–to a government that funds abortion and other terrible evils. Maybe we have a closer connection if we are part owner of pro-abortion companies in mutual funds or other investments (find out if you are here), or if we never warn about abortion through means such as passing out the pro-life, anti-abortion gospel tract here.
Another anti-COVID vaccine argument is that testing has been insufficient. We certainly can always do more testing, and more testing is always commendable, but I believe the likelihood of health problems arising from getting vaccinated is orders of magnitude lower than the likelihood of getting health problems from actually getting COVID. I don’t know anyone who had to go on oxygen or is dead from getting vaccinated, but, sadly, I do know numbers of people who have from actually getting COVID. Testing requirements for vaccines in the US are very rigorous, and the competing companies have every incentive to expose their competitors if another firm’s vaccine is unsafe. Thousands of lawyers hoping for a class action lawsuit, countless doctors, millions of people who simply want safe vaccines, and many other competing interests that make it very difficult for a vaccine known to be unsafe to continue to be marketed in the long term. Also, concern that the vaccine utilizes mRNA and therefore, according to some anti-COVID vaccine conspiracy advocates, changes one’s DNA is simply entirely unsubstantiated and highly inaccurate scientifically. (See also here.) Claims that thousands of people are dying because they got vaccinated, based on misunderstood VAERS data, are simply misinterpreting the data in question and confusing the fact that with millions of people getting vaccinated thousands of people would die afterwards by simple probability does not mean that they died because of the vaccine–one could equally point out that thousands of people died within 24 hours of reading a book or within 24 hours of getting a good night’s sleep and conclude that getting enough sleep or reading books is deadly.
In my opinion, I did not think that other anti-COVID vaccine arguments were very strong after examining both sides of the issue using critical thinking and scientific principles, as commanded in the Bible.
One of the weakest arguments against vaccination that, sadly, I have heard a lot, is that people are only getting vaccinated because they are afraid, while opposing vaccination is the way to be free from fear. In my view, it would be a lot better to make rational arguments rather than imputing motives that one cannot know to the millions of Christians and the many godly preachers and godly households who have gotten vaccinated. For myself, I know that I got vaccinated to honor and show love for the Lord Jesus Christ, to show love for others, and to be a good steward of the life the Lord has given me. I do not doubt that there are many people who have gotten vaccinated because they were afraid of getting COVID and its sometimes serious effects and a lot of people who have not gotten vaccinated because they were afraid of the very rare instances where vaccines have serious side effects. However, I don’t think it would work to go up to a Christian who opposes vaccination and tell him he is just foolishly full of fear and that is why he is anti-vax. That would not get me anywhere. I would probably be more effective if I could show that he was much more likely to be killed on his morning drive to work than he is likely to be killed from getting vaccinated. Nor, if I were against vaccination, would I go up to a Christian who thinks vaccines are blessings from God the Father that save many lives and tell him he is only vaccinated because he is full of fear. If he actually was not full of fear, he would view my false accusation as ridiculous. Instead, whichever side I was on, I would attempt to find logical and scientific arguments for my view instead of assuming things only God knows about other people’s hearts and minds.
So those are the reasons why I got vaccinated against COVID. (Oh, and here is one more–I am tired of wearing masks and look forward to a time when enough people are vaccinated so we can stop wearing them, although I will still wear one when I am supposed to until that time, since I don’t see anywhere in Scripture where it says not to wear one if a private company tells me to on their own property or the government God has ordained (Romans 13) tells me to do it.)
People can be very godly and can know nothing about science, can be very godly and know very little about how vaccination works, be very godly and be very into conspiracy theories, can be very godly and can disagree with this post for a variety of other reasons that may be a lot better than those ones, etc. There is a godly man I know in the United Kingdom who thinks the sun moves around the earth, and says he can prove this because if you jump up and come back on earth the earth does not move away while you are in the air. I am thankful for his being able to serve the Lord. He could well have much more eternal reward in heaven than I will have. If you are reading this and you are an anti-vax Christian, please don’t take this post as a personal attack and get angry. Please think about it rationally instead of reacting emotionally. I would also encourage you, if you don’t already, to remember that “he that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him” (Proverbs 18:13), so make sure you are reading both sides of an issue, not just finding people who agree with you on opposition to vaccination. If you have never read a Christian biology textbook such as those by BJU Press, I would encourage you to check one out and make sure your arguments against vaccines, or against the COVID vaccine in particular, do not require the abandonment of basic biology. If you have never read an article on PubMed by one of the top medical journals, like the New England Journal of Medicine, try reading a few and try avoiding YouTube and social media as sources for information on science. See what your doctor says on the matter. I trust that we would agree that we must be very careful as a Christians, and especially if we are Christian leaders, not to tell people falsehoods, even if we are sincere in advocating them, and we must be very careful so people can distinguish between when we are giving opinions of ours that are uncertain and are matters of Christian liberty and when we are giving people the infallible truth of God’s Word. Of course, you are also welcome to comment on this post. I may not have time to get into a lengthy pro and con argument on vaccination, though, so please don’t be offended if I don’t do that.
I believe getting vaccinated is a Christian liberty issue, and have explained why I have gotten vaccinated. If you have not gotten vaccinated, you are still my brother or sister in Christ. If you are a Christian who cares more about my getting vaccinated than you care about what I think on the gospel, on repentance, on sanctification, on the Triune Godhead, on the church, on worship, on the inspiration and preservation of Scripture, and on other crucial Biblical matters of doctrine and life, and care more about my getting vaccinated then you do about what I do to serve the Lord in my personal life, my family, and my church, then maybe you ought to reexamine your beliefs and see if they are Biblically balanced; maybe you are making anti-vax into a doctrinal issue, and just perhaps you ought not to do that.
May the Lord graciously guide you into His will for you in this matter as you search the Scriptures and apply Biblical principles.
–TDR
The SNOWMAN is a hater–systemically racist, sexist, fascist, and anti-LGBTQ+!!!!!!!
Happy Winter Solstice! I wanted to point out an important point of systemic racism in this evil United States culture of racism, sexism, and xenophobia that you may have overlooked, although it is all around you, promoting microaggressions against womyn and all people of color everywhere. After reading this article, you will have no justification for continuing use of this racist and sexist language, and you should immediately cancel anyone you know who continues to do so. You must start going into restaurants, malls, and other random places, accosting people, and finding out if they are fascists who refuse to cancel these great evils that you are now woke to. If they do not immediately agree with you, hit them in the face, vandalize their car, and take their wallet, as Antifa would explain is the ONLY proper response. What do I refer to, you ask? What could have been missed in the gazillion mandatory diversity training sessions at work, in the now ubiquitous political brainwashing everywhere? I refer to the racist, sexist, and fascist language of the SNOWMAN.
The Snowman—
universal symbol of patriarchy, bigotry,
and fascist, racist, sexist hate.
Note, first of all, the sexism here—it is the snowMAN. Snowwomen, and non-binary, LGBTQ+ snow persuns, are vastly underrepresented minorities in this cold, hard world. You must immediately cease referring to the patriarchal term “snowman” and speak, instead of “snow persuns.” Certainly children—excuse me, those who identify as being in the age group whose age assigned at birth is zero/newborn—should not be encouraged to build or play with snowmen. At the very least, all snowmen should be built with a frown instead of a smile, and with frozen tears or icicles of contrition for the sexist male privilege into which they have been ushered, and a taller, stronger, happy, Biden-Harris snowwomyn should be built next to any snowman.
The snowwoman—not sexist like the snowman, but still racist and white supremacist
Note as well, that snowmen—and even snowwomyn—are overwhelmingly white. Diversity in snowpersuns is almost entirely lacking. White snowmen should be frozen out high-level colleges and job opportunities attractive to them, whether in refrigeration, arctic travel, or ice cream sales, until snowpersuns of color, and snowpersuns of every kind of racial, gender, and sexual minority, are overrepresented in every income bracket of our systemically racist, sexist, and fascist nation, and there are equal numbers of diverse snowpersuns found in winter in North Dakota and in summer in Arizona.
Don’t try to cover your hate with the argument that snowpersuns are white because snow is white—it’s just nature. That’s the same type of old fascist argument people make against transgender rights when they claim there are only men and women—it’s just nature. No, “nature” is just a social construct, just like “men,” “women,” and the color of snow. This does not need to be proven—everyone that is woke knows it, and if you deny it you are giving in to white privilege and are just a RACIST SEXIST FASCIST. Q. E. D.
A LGBTQ+ Non-Binary, Socialist/Communist,
Snowbeing of Color Snowpersun—
the ONLY acceptable alternative for tolerant persuns.
(No picture included because there aren’t any yet.)
I hope that you are now woke to the great evil of building, encouraging children to play with, or in any way supporting the racist and sexist evil of the SNOWMAN. Dear reader, if you have every used such racist and sexist language, please send me a check of no less than $10,000 for every time you have supported patriarchy with this now cancelled term, to show that you are now fully in on diversity, inclusion and tolerance. I will donate the appropriate portion of your guilt offering to our local Antifa chapter while keeping the rest for myself. If you do not, I will burn your house down to show what tolerant people do to intolerant fascists like you.
So in conclusion: The snowman—cancel him!
Recent Comments