Search the Scriptures: April 15, 2001
IDOLATROUS FEELINGS
INTRODUCTION:
A. Good morning my friends and welcome to this edition of Search the Scriptures. On behalf
of the Danville church of Christ I am delighted to be able to spend these next few minutes with
you as we endeavor to understand better the words of Scripture. Before we begin our study this
morning, I want to again remind you of a special week the Danville church of Christ is
planning. Beginning on Sunday, April 29 (this is just two weeks from today) and continuing
through Friday, May 4 we will be engaging in a gospel meeting. We have invited brother Earl
Robertson, an evangelist from Glasgow, Kentucky to preach for us that week. Brother
Robertson is a knowledgeable and experienced gospel preacher; one who knows the Lord and
the bible, and who will, in a most capable manner present the truth of God’s word. I assure you
that you will not want to miss this special evangelistic effort of the Danville church of Christ.
Therefore, be marking your calendars for April 29 through May 4. A gospel meeting with the
Danville church of Christ. The times will be 7:30 each weeknight, Monday through Friday. But
to get the meeting off to a good start we have decided to change our services on Sunday, April
29. This change will affect only our evening worship and it will be for April 29 only. The day
our meeting begins, Sunday, April 29 we have scheduled a special song service at 2:30 P.M.
And then our evening worship will begin at 3:30 P.M.; immediately following our singing. I
hope to see you at our gospel meeting, beginning Sunday, April 29 and continuing through
Friday, May 4.
B. As we begin our study this morning, I want to read with you from the Old Testament book of
Judges. Judg. 17:6 says, in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right
in his own eyes. This phrase is found at least four times in the book of Judges. In Judg. 18:1 and
19:1 and also in Judg. 21:25 do we read, in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone
did what was right in his own eyes. Probably the reason this was said in the book was to help
date the book of Judges. That is, we are being told that this book was written during the time in
Israel’s history when there was no king. That is, the historical period of the book of Judges was
during the 300 or so years after the death of Joshua, the hand-picked successor of Moses and the
inauguration of King Saul, the first king in Israel. But, this phrase is also very enlightening
because it helps us to understand the moral, religious and political decay of the time. This was a
horrible time in the history of Israel. Crime, immorality, idolatry and murder were daily
occurrences. And the reason there was so much corruption, mayhem and evil in Israel were
because in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.
That is, when there was no king, there was no central rule of law. During this time there was no
standard of authority; there was no standard rule of law governing and controlling the people.
Everyone did what he or she felt like doing. Everyone became a law unto himself or herself. If
there were sixteen million Israelites, then there would have been sixteen million different ethical
standards. Everyone would have been doing what he or what she felt was the right thing to do.
My friends, this is precisely what happens whenever you remove any standard of rule. That is,
whenever a people or a society removes any objective standard of law, then the result will be
everyone does what he or she feels like doing. This is moral relativism! And, ladies and
gentlemen, I believe it can be safely stated that moral relativism is descriptive of what governs
and guides the way of life of many within our society, whether in or out of religious institutions
known as churches. Today, instead of being governed and guided by the God of the bible, men
and women have made tiny gods out of their hearts or out of their own feelings. Today both in
and out of the church, men and women are seeking to determine what’s right and what’s wrong
not by the bible, but by their feelings. That is, if I feel it’s wrong then it’s wrong. But if I feel it’s
right, then for me it’s right. My friends, this is the practice of moral relativism! Today whenever
the question of ethical behavior is discussed, often the first thing to go is the bible. Men and
women are not wishing to be guided by an objective standard of law, instead they wish to be
controlled solely by what each one feels to be right at the time. Today, whenever proprieties are
discussed, people do not want to hear about any rule of law, instead they are wanting to be
guided by the idolatrous feelings they might have about a given issue. For example, take three
societal issues and it is hard to get - even religious - people to agree on what is right and what is
wrong. Consider the issue of assisted suicide. The question is: “Is it wrong [sinful] to commit
suicide?” Now, how do you answer that question? Can, or should you answer it with a yes or a
no? “Is it wrong [sinful] to commit suicide?” Today, ladies and gentlemen, those who wallow in
moral relativism couches the question in a heart-touching situation that is designed to blur the
issue and encourage you to make a god of your emotions. For example, instead of asking “Is it
wrong [sinful] to commit suicide?” The question is framed this way: “Your spouse has
developed a deadly form of cancer and has been suffering for months. He [or she] is pleading
with you to call someone - a doctor - to help commit suicide so the suffering can stop.” Now,
instead of seeking an objective standard for a solution you are being asked to decide based upon
how you feel about it. It is as though in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did
what was right in his own eyes. Consider the question of abortion. Traditionally religious
people [and especially those in churches of Christ] have spoken out against abortion and in
support of the life of an unborn child, but this support for life is waning today. Instead of asking
the question: “Is abortion wrong [sinful]?” The issue is couched in a situation engineered to get
people to decide based not upon a standard of ethics, but instead upon the tiny deities of
emotion. So, instead of asking is abortion wrong? The question is formatted like this. “You have
a 15-year-year-old daughter who has been raped by a mentally retarded man with AIDS and the
attack has conceived a child.” This situation is presented to get you to decide a moral and
ethical matter not based upon an objective standard, such as the word of God. Instead you are
asked to decide based upon how you feel about the matter. It is as though in those days there
was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes. Also, today, instead of
asking “Is adultery wrong [that is, sinful]?” A question that demands a yes or no answer, the
question is framed within the context of an emotional situation designed to manipulate your
answer. The question is often framed like this. “A woman in a German concentration camp - to
survive - purposely initiates a relationship with a camp guard in order to conceive a child so
that she can be released as a liability.” Now, you are being asked to decide if this is right or
wrong based upon how you feel about the plight of the captive woman, and not by an objective
standard of law. My friends, this is designed to convince you that the guiding light of your life is
not God nor his word, but your feelings. The truth of the matter is that many people are bowing
down and serving the tiny gods of their emotions. That is, however they happen to feel about a
matter at the time is what becomes right or what becomes wrong. It is as though in those days
there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes. Dr. Allan Bloom
wrote the following in his book, “The Closing of the American Mind.” “There is one thing a
professor can be absolutely certain of. Almost every student entering the University believes that
truth is relative. The students, of course, cannot defend their opinion. It is something with which
they have been indoctrinated . . . Students will go on to say, ‘Of course I’m not judging anyone.
If you think that is all right, then that is OK, but I’m personally against it.’” Strangely, my
friends, all this is being done under the umbrella of tolerance. Today our children are being
inundated with this psychobabble called tolerance. Today children and adults alike are more
afraid of being called intolerant than just about any other label they could be called. But, what is
being meant by tolerance and intolerance today is not what we grew up with. Tolerance today
does not mean respecting someone’s culture, traditions, language or even race. Tolerance in
2001 means we must accept the values, morals and lifestyles of other people that we might
consider to be morally representable, as equal to our own. That is, if I am going to be considered
tolerant then I must accept homosexuality as a lifestyle equal to and sometimes superior to
heterosexuality. If I speak out against homosexuality, abortion or some other societal moral issue
then I will be considered an intolerant bigot. This is why so many people are living together
without getting married. They will tell you they have a different value system than you have.
And, while living together might not be right for you, they are perfectly comfortable with this
arrangement, and you must accept it or be branded intolerant. This is the same attitude prevalent
in the days of the judges. In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was
right in his own eyes.
I. However, my friends, such a rejection of moral absolutes will never work. Throughout the
bible whenever the people rejected moral absolutes in favor of relativism, corruption and
destruction always followed. All one needs to do is read the book of Judges to see that sin and
violence fills almost every chapter. Whether we discuss the idolatry of Judg. 17 or the rape and
murder of chapter 19, we are shown that moral relativism will not work. In the book of Judges
there is a vicious cycle that repeats itself over and over. The people grow wicked and begin to be
governed by their moral relativism. After which, God brings judgment upon them as punishment
for their sinful behavior. They repent for a while only to fall back into their old ways and the
cycle begins again. My friends, we cannot hope to survive either as a country or a church if we
forsake God’s rule of law and seek to be guided by the gods of our emotions. Ladies and
gentlemen, some things are wrong because God says they are and it does not matter how I feel
about it. In the New Testament book of Romans, Paul said this in Rom. 1:32 who, knowing the
righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not
only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. The context of this statement
began in verse 18 where Paul begins to catalogue sins that caused God to abandon these sinful
people because they developed a debased [or corrupt] mind according to verse 28. However, the
salient point I believe Paul is making is this. God expects people to know that some things are to
be considered wrong and it does not matter how we might feel about it. He said people knowing
the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death.
This is something you and I must know. We must know that those who reject God’s objective
rule of law are deserving of death. Men of God, [the prophets of the Old Testament and the
apostles of the New] always appealed for moral behavior. Nowhere in all the bible does God
grant man the liberty to decide moral behavior based upon how he might feel about it. These
men of God always assumed that all people, everywhere, knew there were such things as right
and such things as wrong. And these things were always determined by God revelation and not
by man’s idolatrous feelings. Three times in the book of Romans, beginning in Rom. 1:25 do we
read about something called the truth of God. Furthermore, God demands that men and women
live in compliance with this truth of God and not follow what we might feel about a matter. It is
absolutely foolhardy to try to operate outside the law of God. It cannot be done. Regardless of
how I might feel about a matter, regardless of the feelings I might have about a given situation,
regardless of whether I feel something is right or wrong, it is God’s word and not my feelings
that determines what is right and wrong.
II. My friends, God has made his very character and nature the standard of our moral and ethical
behavior. Peter said in 1 Pet. 1:14-16 as obedient children, not conforming yourselves to the
former lusts, as in your ignorance; but as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all
your conduct, because it is written, be holy, for I am holy. It is not my feelings, it is not my
happiness and it is not my perception of what’s fair that drives my conduct. Rather, it is my
complying with the holiness and righteousness of God. This, I believed can be summed up
tersely in two bible verses. The first is Deut. 10:12-13 that says, and now, Israel, what does the
Lord your God require of you, but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways and to
love him, to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the
commandments of the Lord and his statutes which I command you today for your good? Note
carefully, that God said to fear him, walk in his ways, serve him and keep his statutes. He said
nothing about feelings. He did not say you determine how you feel about a matter and then act
upon those feelings. God said he was to be obeyed. God does not permit you to pass judgment
upon his word based upon how you feel about it. Instead he says you and I are to obey him. God
says men and women are to keep his commandments. My friends, we are to obey God whether
we feel it is the best or not. We are to obey his commands - and how we feel about it has
absolutely no bearing upon the matter whatsoever. How I might personally feel about a situation
or a mandate from God is meaningless. It’s what God says and my obedience to it that matters.
The second verse that bears directly on this subject is in the New Testament. In Titus 2:11-12
Paul writes, for the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us
that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in
the present age. The bible says we are to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and this is so
whether we feel it’s fair, whether we feel it’s the best or not. God did not give us the liberty to
determine how we feel about any matter. Instead he tells us to obey him. He tells us to deny
ungodliness and worldly lusts and live godly whether we feel like it or not. This means, my
friends, there are some things we are not permitted to do. Also, there are some things we must do
and how we might feel about it does not matter at all. If my actions violate God’s ethical
standards of right and wrong, then I am condemned and my feelings to the contrary. However, if
I elevate my feelings above the word of God, then I’ve made an idol of my feelings. If I elevate
my happiness above the word of God, then I’ve made an idol of my happiness. And once the
standard is rejected, corruption will naturally follow, like evening follows day. When God’s
word, which is his standard of rule is rejected then people will simply begin to do what was done
in Isaiah’s day. In Isa. 5:20-21 we read of this warning. Woe to those who call evil good, and
good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and
sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
Sadly in many churches today you do not have preachers or church leaders who appeal to the
scriptures as the only rule of law. Today has seen the building of idols in the hearts of men and
women who once respected God’s rule of law. Today we are hearing more and more men and
women declare that it’s impossible to know for certain what is truth. Consequently, decisions are
being made, doctrine is being formulated and ethical behavior decided based not upon the
teaching of scriptures, but instead upon how one happens to feel about a matter at the time. And
once this abolition of standards is complete then we never have to decide what is right or wrong,
because that depends on how we feel about it. Also, we will never have to say someone else is
wrong, because if he or she is sincerely doing what feels right, then who has the right to be
judgmental? And, you know this is something we are hearing people say today. They want to
find a church that is not so judgmental. That is, they want to find a church that will be tolerant of
their life choices. After all, they are doing what they feel is right, therefore they don’t need
someone to say it’s wrong. Oh, we might hear a lot about inappropriate behavior, but we don’t
hear much about sinful behavior, because people don’t feel that what they are doing is sinful. It
may be unseemly or nontraditional, or it may be questionable but if I feel comfortable with it,
then you don’t have the right to question my behavior. Sound familiar? This was the moral
compass during the days of the judges. In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did
what was right in his own eyes. People both in and out of the church have made gods of their
feelings. What they feel is more important than what the book of God says about it. A few years
back a young woman sat across the table from some elders and told them that yes she was living
with her boyfriend, and she knew the elders did not agree with her, but she didn’t “feel” that
what she was doing was wrong. Imagine that, my friends! Here is a young woman who is
shacking up and said she didn’t feel it was wrong. Frankly, God couldn’t care less how she feels,
because he says her behavior is sinful. It was Earnest Hemingway and not God who wrote:
“Good is what you feel good after doing, and bad is what you feel bad after doing.” As a result
of erecting idols to worship our feelings, we’ve defined deviant behavior down. That is, what
was once considered immoral behavior is now tolerated. What was once considered, based upon
the bible, to be sinful is now accepted as norm. The reason? Because of the way we happen to
feel about it at the time.
III. Ladies and gentlemen, remember this. Whenever we reduce the discussion of ethics to a
discussion of feelings, we have rejected the standard of the bible. Whenever we conclude the
rightness or wrongness of something based upon how we feel about it, we have rejected the rule
of God’s law. Let me show you how this works. Today, the question is asked: “How do you feel
about granting gays the right to marry?” And, people mull around this question and stammer
out an answer something like this. “Well, I believe we live in a free country, and everyone, even
those with whom I might personally differ, has a right to establish a meaningful relationship. I
might not believe that homosexuality is right for me, but as an American, I feel everybody should
be free to choose what’s best for them.” My friends, such a discussion based upon feelings has
removed the law of God and replaced it with the rule of feelings. It does not matter what the
constitution guarantees, it does not matter what rights some State grants and it matters less how I
might feel about it. The fact of the matter is this. God says any and all homosexual relationships
are sinful. Rom. 1:26-27 says, for this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even
their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men,
leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men
committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was
due. God says it’s sinful behavior, it’s unnatural and it is shameful. And how I feel about it is
mindless. How does God view this matter? I better be alining myself with God and not seek to
appear broad-minded and tolerant. Furthermore, these verses will not change regardless of who
happens to decide to come out of the closet. Homosexuality is sinful even if it is your neighbor,
even if it is your favorite actor and even if it is your son or daughter. Homosexuality cannot be
discussed in the context of feelings, but instead it can only be discussed in the context of
scripture. But, also consider this question that many churches are struggling with. “How do you
feel about divorce today?” In many church settings this question is being answered something
like this. “Well, I know that traditionally the church has frowned upon divorce unless it was for
adultery, but there are so many people locked up in unhappy marriages, that I feel they should
have a right to get out and find happiness. I personally feel that divorce should be a last resort,
but I also feel that everyone should have a right to be happy, and choose what’s best for them.”
My friends, whenever we begin a discussion about marriage and divorce with our feelings
instead of the bible then we have abandoned all rule of law. Jesus said in Matt. 19:9, in answer
to the question of whether it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason, and I
say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another,
commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery. It does not
matter how you feel about it, it does not matter how your mother or your daughter feels about it,
and it does not make any difference how your preacher feels about it, Jesus said any divorce
except one for sexual immorality [or fornication] is sinful. And how I may personally feel about
it is meaningless. This is the rule of law and what I feel about it does not change one thing the
Lord said. You know, my friends, there are many salving their feelings after having disobeyed
the Lord - pertaining to marriage and divorce by twisting the writings of Paul in 1 Cor. 7 to
accommodate what they feel about divorce. For example, some say that Paul permits some sort
of unofficial separation whenever two people can’t get along in 1 Cor. 7:1-5. No, my friends, 1
Cor. 7:1-5 only authorized a temporary delay of the marriage bed by mutual consent for the
specific reasons of fasting and prayer. To apply these verses to two people who are behaving
ungodly is wrong. Also, 1 Cor. 7:11 is being twisted to offer hope to those who have rejected
the Lord’s teaching in favor of feelings. After telling a woman she may not depart from her
husband, Paul says, but even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to
her husband. One well-known brother in his commentary on 1 Corinthians said this. “The
statement ‘but if she depart’ describes an exception whether past, present, or future . . . Paul
recognized that, in spite of the commandments, some would nevertheless choose not to live
together. In such cases, there were only two alternatives available.” Imagine that! God says
don’t separate but if you feel you can’t obey me, then I guess it’s OK, so here is what you can
do. And, by the way this verse is addressing divorce and not some foolish unscriptural legal
separation. He said the only remedy for violating the will of God pertaining to divorce was
reconciliation or else remain unmarried. A separated person is married but a divorced person is
unmarried. There is only one cause for divorce and that is adultery. If you have disobeyed God’s
rule of law then you better repent of this, seek reconciliation and if that proves impossible
because your former spouse refuses, then you must live unmarried. This is what God says, and I
must not abandon his will in order to worship the idol I have erected of my feelings.
CONCLUSION:
A. Ladies and gentlemen, regardless of how we feel about a matter, God and his word must have
final say. We must tear down these idols of feelings and once again return to the revealed will of
almighty God.
B. This will have to be our final comment for today. Be with us next Sunday morning at 7:00
A.M. as we again Search the Scriptures. Until then, this is J.R. Bronger saying goodbye for
now.