*Simple Faith

Two curly-haired children stood in front of their father as he knelt down to hug them. They were dressed in their best clothes: Jimmy in dark pants, white shirt, suspenders, and bowtie, and Jenny in a pink dress, white shoes, and ribbons in her golden hair. It was not every day that they went down to the train station to see their father off on a long trip.

Daddy was talking. "I'm going to be gone for a while—I don't know how long, but I'll be back before you know it. I have to take care of some business out of the country, and once that's done, I'm coming home to stay. So, mind your Momma and do your chores to help her out. You'll both probably be a foot taller when I get back, but I will be back, I promise."

He gave their mother a kiss and a long hug, and then he was gone. The train pulled out of the station, and they waved like mad as they watched it chug away. Soon, there was nothing else to see, so they sadly returned home, changed clothes, and went about their daily routine.

Days passed, then weeks, then months. Daddy's business overseas seemed to be taking longer than he had thought. Momma told them not to worry, that he would be back with them before they knew it. If they just kept themselves busy, the time would go faster, she said. So Jimmy and Jenny plunged into their school work, did all their chores, read long books, played with the neighbor kids, and grew like beansprouts.

Yet, Daddy still had not come home. As they often did, the children sat on the porch swing in the cool of the evening just before bedtime, watching the fireflies come out. Jenny suspected that Jimmy was down, and he proved it a few minutes later. "I don't think Daddy's coming back," he said. "If he was, he'd be here already. He's forgotten about us."

"That's not true!" said Jenny fiercely, almost shouting. "Daddy said he would come back, so he is coming back!"

Jimmy just shook his head, saying, "How do you know? You're just a little girl."

"So what if I'm a little girl!" she yelled. "Daddy promised! He'll be back soon, just you wait!"

They had similar arguments over the next weeks, Jimmy always doubting, Jenny always certain that their father would arrive home soon. She looked for him everywhere, expecting him to be walking up the drive when she peeked out the front window or be at the train station when they went into town. Jimmy mocked her for a silly goose, but she never wavered in her certainty that their Daddy would come back just as he had said.

Then, suddenly, he was home. They woke up one morning and stumbled out to the kitchen for breakfast, and Daddy was there, kneeling in front of them, giving them the biggest, longest hug that they had ever had! He told them how much he had missed them and how he had wanted to come home sooner, but things had just not worked out until the last few weeks. Then he had hurried back to be with them again for good.

Jenny shed tears of pure joy, refusing to let her father go, but Jimmy was bawling like a baby, choking out, "I'm sorry, Daddy! I'm sorry!"

"What do you mean?" Daddy asked, concerned. "There's nothing to be sorry about."

Wiping away tears, Jimmy said, "I didn't believe you were coming back. Jenny said you would, but it had been so long, and you weren't here, so I thought you would never come back to us."

"Well, here I am!" Daddy said. "Now you know you can trust my word."

*****

While this may be just a story about a little girl's simple faith, it captures the essence of the biblical concept of faith. Sometimes, we tend to make things a bit too theological and difficult, wanting to know all the facets and permutations of a doctrine, but when it comes down to the nitty-gritty of faith, it is trusting Him, taking God at His word and believing it. In its most basic form, faith can be expressed in the sentiment, "If God said it, that's good enough for me!"

We grapple with the definition that the author of Hebrews pens in Hebrews 11:1: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." We look in various Bible translations for one that will make it plain, something like "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, being convinced of what we do not see" (New English Translation). We delve into the Greek words for a clearer picture of the author's intent. We pore through commentaries for learned opinions about the verse—and we may still come away scratching our heads.

We know from verses like Hebrews 11:1 that faith is not simple in all its theological ramifications, but in its everyday use, it is not difficult. While He does not use the word "faith" on this occasion, it is what Jesus alludes to in Luke 11:28, "Blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it!" His declaration is reminiscent of the times when people—usually Gentiles—came to Him for healing and simply believed that, in saying the sick person would be healed, all was well. That was the case when the centurion asked Him to heal his servant, and Jesus "marveled, and said to those who followed, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel'" (Matthew 8:10).

The apostle Paul, speaking of the faith of Abraham, calls him "the father of us all" (Romans 4:16). What marked the greatness of Abraham's faith? Paul answers for us in Romans 4:3, quoting Genesis 15:6: "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." The patriarch trusted God's promise that his descendants from the then-unborn Isaac would be as the number of stars in the heavens (Genesis 15:3-5). God's promise was good enough for him. It would happen just as God had said.

His faith in God's Word sustained him when, years later, God tested him: "Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and . . . offer him . . . as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you" (Genesis 22:2). How could his offspring be as numerous as the stars if Isaac died before having children? So, when Isaac asked where the lamb for the offering was, Abraham answered in faith, "My son, God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering" (verses 7-8). He went so far as to bind his son and raise the knife, knowing, in faith, that God would intervene or perform a resurrection so that His promise would not be broken.

Such is the simple faith God desires us to display in the course of our daily lives. Paul teaches that "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:17). Faith comes and grows when we hear God's Word and believe it, trusting God to do as He has said. So David writes in Psalm 37:5: "Commit your way to the LORD, trust also in Him, and He shall bring it to pass." That is a promise we can count on!

*How Revelation Enters the Church

Many years ago, during Herbert W. Armstrong's ministry, we read the passage beginning in Galatians 1:6 quite often. He would tell us that the apostle Paul had written this epistle less than thirty years after Christ's death and resurrection, making it one of the earliest-written books in the New Testament. He pointed out as amazing and alarming what was already beginning to happen within the church:

I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. . . . For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ. But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ. (Galatians 1:6-8, 10-12)

Only a little more than a generation had passed since the founding of the church, yet false gospels, perversions of the truth, were making serious trouble for those early Christians. Paul was warning those in Galatia not to listen to those who are trying to persuade them away from the true doctrines of God, which they had learned when the apostles had preached the true gospel to them.

After warning them, Paul defends himself against the unwritten question, "How do we know that you preached us the truth?" He asks in return, "From what you've seen of me, do I try to seek the favor of men or God? Do I seem to be a men-pleaser?" Clearly, he always put the truth of God before pleasing people, and he had had to pay the price for it in persecution and peril (see II Corinthians 11:23-33). He considered these sacrifices proof that he was a true servant of God.

Then, in Galatians 1:11-12, he lets them know where the message he had taught them came from. He was taught, he said, not by any man (verse 16), but by Jesus Christ Himself. Once God had called him on the road to Damascus, and after he was baptized, he went down to Arabia (verse 17), and stayed there for three years (verse 18). It was there that Christ taught him the truth as an apostle "born out of due time" (I Corinthians 15:8). Christ had a special job for Paul and wanted to give Him the same kind of instruction that He had given the Twelve.

No one knows if Christ came down and appeared to him, teaching him directly, or whether He opened Paul's mind and revealed the truth out of Scripture. However, when he went up to Jerusalem three years later and talked with Peter, James, and John, he found out that they agreed completely on the gospel of God (Galatians 2:9). These apostles understood that Paul was a fellow apostle with them and that he would preach primarily to the Gentiles.

By his personal history, Paul shows that he had received the same revelation from God that the original disciples had been given. Thus, the gospel that Paul preached was the same gospel that Peter, John, and the other apostles were also preaching. They all preached from the same Source: Jesus Christ. Our beliefs should rest on that same foundation, which is now printed in our Bibles. Notice Ephesians 2:19-22:

Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

In terms of revelation from God, this passage informs us that a true understanding is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets. In the past, God revealed certain things to the prophets in Old Testament times and to the apostles in New Testament times, and they wrote those things down for our learning (see Hebrews 1:1; Romans 15:4; I Corinthians 10:11). Jesus Christ is called "the chief cornerstone" because He is the true Foundation and Source of all revelation. He is the One who joins all the revelation together and makes it work. We, then, having this sure foundation, not only learn the truth, but also grow by it into the image of Christ.

The apostle continues in Ephesians 3:

For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles—if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets. (Ephesians 3:1-5)

Paul uses the subject of God's grace toward the Gentiles as a way to get across, not only that he preached the true gospel, but also how truth comes into the church of God. It is very simple: God revealed something to him, and he, then, wrote it down in a few words, so that we could read and comprehend his understanding of this mystery of God's way. That is how it works. God inspired a prophet or an apostle, and he wrote it down. Over time, it became Scripture, and now we read it, using the Holy Spirit that God has given us, to understand the truth.

At the end of the Bible, in Revelation 22:18-19, John warns the reader not to add to or take away from the words written in the Book. Essentially, he is telling us that revelation from God to man is closed; the canon of Scripture is complete. What we need to know for salvation is in the finished work of the Bible. Anyone who claims to have a new revelation, that he has some "new truth" beyond Scripture, is a false teacher, one of those who "pervert the gospel of Christ."

So the Bible is the collected writings of the apostles and prophets to whom God gave His precious revelation for all of us to learn and use. God's converted children do not need any advanced degrees, courses in higher thinking and logic, or any kind of worldly help to understand God's truth. All they need is the Word of God and a humble mind that can reason normally, and God, by the gifts of His Spirit, provides the understanding.

Apologizing for the Dead

On a regular basis, the church receives a question from a subscriber or a visitor to one of its websites about the Mormon practice of baptism for the dead. The Latter-Day Saints base their doctrine on I Corinthians 15:29, in which the apostle Paul seems to mention that it was being practiced in his day: "Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they baptized for the dead?" The Mormons interpret these two questions to mean that Paul approved of the practice, using the fact of the resurrection from the dead to reason, "What good is baptizing for the dead if there is no such thing as a resurrection?"

The Bible, however, asserts in many passages that, before a person can be baptized, he must first repent (Acts 2:38) and believe (Mark 16:16; Acts 16:31, 33), but the dead, of course, cannot repent or believe because "the dead know nothing" (Ecclesiastes 9:5). Baptism is for the living; it is a ritual by which a living person acknowledge his sins, figuratively dies with Christ in a watery grave, and rises out of it to live a new, righteous life through Jesus Christ and the indwelling of God's Holy Spirit (Romans 6:4; 8:9; Galatians 2:20). Besides, there is no scriptural support for reconciling with God by proxy!

There is also a translation problem with I Corinthians 15:29. Paul is not talking about being baptized "on behalf of" or "for" the dead. The Greek word translated "for" is huper (often transliterated hyper), and it has several meanings: "above," "over," "instead of," "for the realization of," or "for the hope of," depending upon the context. Here, it is best translated as "for the hope of": "Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the hope of the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they then baptized for the hope of the dead?"

What is the hope of the dead? The resurrection, and baptism illustrates this when a person rises out of the water, just as the saints will rise from the grave in the resurrection. Paul is thus saying, "What good is it to be baptized if we do not rise in a resurrection from the dead? Why then should one be baptized for a hope that would never be realized?" The apostle affirms in verses 17-22 that, because Christ died and rose again, we indeed have this hope to look forward to.

Now, however, the modern culture of victimization has put its own twist on this false doctrine. Today, minority groups are demanding apologies for historical wrongs perpetrated on their ancestors. For instance, a small but vocal segment of the American black population is demanding not only that an apology be given for their forebears' bondage, but also that reparations be paid to them for their ancestors' work, pain, and suffering. Sons and daughters of Americans of Japanese descent have asked for—and received—similar words and payments for their parents' internment during WWII. Not to be left out, descendants of American Indians desire an admission of national guilt and restitution as well.

This concept has reached out to embroil industry as well:

A Chicago ordinance required Wachovia [a North Carolina-based financial holding company] to look through its history for any relationship to slavery. Because the bank was established in 1781, an investigation showed that it had connections to hundreds of now defunct banks, including two that were involved with the slave trade before the Civil War.

Ken Thompson, Wachovia chairman and chief executive officer, expressed his regret in a press release, stating that he was "deeply saddened" by the discovery and apologized "especially to African-Americans and people of African descent." . . .

Wachovia is not the first bank to apologize for connections to slavery. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. admitted to past slavery connections earlier this year. The bank offered to create a $5 million scholarship program for African-American youth, but reparation activists dismissed the offer as insignificant.

WCNC.com, the website of a Charlotte, N.C., television station, has reported that black leaders in that region plan to take steps toward seeking financial damages for the slave trade of the 18th and 19th centuries. (Alexa Moutevelis, "Wachovia Apology Renews Reparations Debate," CNSNews.com, June 03, 2005)

Most people realize that the reparations movement is nothing more than an organized shakedown of the government and wealthy corporations. Cherchez l'argent, as the French say: "Follow the money." If the movement were really about principle, a statement of regret would be enough.

Is this any different in principle from baptism for the dead? America is 140 years removed from slavery, and obviously, none of the original players in that drama is still alive. Not one slave owner can apologize for his slaving ways, and not one former slave is still living to receive it. While the dim repercussions of slavery are still felt—predominantly in the form of racism, a different subject altogether—slavery itself and any apologies or reparations are literally a dead issue! As God puts it, "The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself" (Ezekiel 18:20). Guilt and recompense are not legally transferable to subsequent generations.

Besides, America paid the price of slavery. Over half a million men gave their lives in a war that settled the question of involuntary servitude in the United States, not to mention the destruction to America's economy and infrastructure due to that war, especially in the South, where the institution of slavery flourished for centuries. In the meantime, the descendants of slaves have won legal equality with whites and the same access to the American dream as any other citizen.

Perhaps the saddest part of this fiasco is realizing how many people are wasting their time, resources, and energy on fighting the squabbles of the past, when they could be working to make their and their children's futures brighter.

Do You Believe—Really Believe?

The death of Pope John Paul II and the election of Pope Benedict XVI made the Catholic Church—and the Catholic faith—front-page news around the globe. At least three days of wall-to-wall airtime were devoted to the Pope's death, his funeral, and the new Pope's election, and during this exclusive coverage, talking heads discussed wide-ranging linking topics, such as priestly celibacy, contraception, abortion, ordination of women, the centrality of Mary, the church's opposition to the Iraq war, and various other tenets of Catholicism. The news reporting also showed the world a great deal of the traditional ritual, liturgy, and trappings of the Vatican.

This week was also the lead-up to the Passover, so there have been a few articles, reports, and shows on Jewish beliefs and practices too. One public television show that I viewed briefly Thursday night employed an actor to recite and explain the whole traditional Pesach Seder. Each word and movement are carefully ordered (the meaning of the Hebrew word seder) so that nothing untoward creeps into the ritual. I was also reminded this week of how the Jews have combined the Passover—commanded by God to be kept on the fourteenth day of the first month—with the first day of Unleavened Bread—a holy day celebrated on the fifteenth day. By doing this, they have lost much of the meaning of both days.

We were also recently treated to the Anglican blessing of the marriage of Prince Charles to Camilla Parker-Bowles. Although the actual vows were spoken before a civil officer, the groom's mother, Queen Elizabeth II, who is also the head of the English church, permitted her son and new daughter-in-law this blessing if they confessed to their sinful premarital relationship. With the usual English pomp and circumstance, both priests and the royal couple read selections from the English Book of Prayer, sang a hymn or two, and looked contrite, and all was forgiven. For all this, the Prince of Wales gets to marry his longtime paramour, and Camilla receives a vaunted title, Duchess of Cornwall (she also can use "Princess of Wales," but for decorum's sake—at least for the time being—she has said she will refrain).

What is the common denominator in these three items? Each of the three religions claims the Bible, in whole or in part, as their source of belief and practice, but none of them seems to care that what they espouse and observe does not square with biblical teaching! Where does the Bible command priestly celibacy, the use of the title "Holy Father" for a man, or even the office of "Vicar of Christ"? Where does the Old Testament ordain the rigid formula of the Seder or allow Passover and the Night To Be Much Observed to be combined? In what epistle does God give a monarch authority over the church or permit and reward wanton, extramarital behavior in its next leader?

All of these religions are highly traditional faiths—to the extent that tradition has gained dominance in their practices, particularly in their rituals and governance. Jesus, of course, lambasted the Pharisees, the originators of the current rabbinical Judaism, on just this point:

. . . you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying, "These people draw near to Me with their mouth, and honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrine the commandments of men." (Matthew 15:6-9)

Tradition in religion is a wonderful thing when it has a firm basis in the truth of God, but it becomes a deceitful and corrupting influence when its foundations are in the shifting sands of human thought. It is especially diabolical when it masquerades as rich and sublime while actually directly contradicting God's Word! This, for instance, is the case with calling the Pope "Holy Father." What blasphemy! Jesus Himself instructs His disciples, "Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven" (Matthew 23:9). No matter how saintly a man any Pope might seem, he can never even in the smallest way be comparable to God the Father!

Truly, "now we see in a mirror, dimly" when it comes to the revelation of God; none of us has God's Word down perfectly. Nevertheless, there is a wide gulf between sincere seeking of God's revealed truth and blatant disregard for the plain teachings of Scripture! Keeping tradition despite God's commandment to the contrary is nothing less than idolatry—exalting human ideas and desires above God's. It is what has become known as humanism, and it is an identifying mark of false religion.

God's true church has and follows the Bible, God's Instruction Book for Christian practice, which is what religion is. It resists outside intrusions of worldly philosophies and measures all new ideas against pure, confirmed, God-breathed Word (II Peter 1:19-21). On the other side, false religions have eaten of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 2:9, 17; 3:1-11), mixing godly teaching with false, human self-righteousness. It is an extremely simple test but highly effective in exposing false or corrupted faiths.

Jesus says straightforwardly, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent" (John 6:29). God's efforts are engaged in getting us to believe in Jesus, sure, but believing in Jesus is far more than accepting that He died for the forgiveness of our sins—it is believing what He said for our instruction and what He lived as an example to us. It is following Him, imitating Him, obeying Him, and becoming more and more like Him every day!

So, do we really believe Him? Or, are we just treading water, ignorantly or even willfully continuing in the traditions of our parents because we are too lazy, too content, or too fearful to follow the truth? God is seeking men and women to worship Him in spirit and truth (John 4:23), and these are the ones who really believe. Are we among them? Have we examined ourselves "as to whether [we] are in the faith" (II Corinthians 13:5)? Do we really and truly believe?

The Victim: Truth

As the presidential campaign grinds on toward the day of the election, everyone agrees that this political season has degraded into one of the meanest in recent memory. TownHall.com quotes Prison Fellowship founder Chuck Colson as saying, "When I was in politics, I was accused of being Nixon's 'dirty tricks expert'—but I never rose to the heights, or rather sank to the depths, of this year's campaign." Colson writes in his column, "Campaign of Hate," on September 16, 2004:

In one sense, the degrading of political discourse is part of a broader pattern in American life: the coarsening of culture. You see it in the clothing people wear (or don't wear), the lack of manners, and the vulgar language that has become commonplace. Cultures coarsen when morality declines.

But this year there's something more to it.

We have come to expect mudslinging and attack ads, especially during the waning days of presidential campaigns. Two and a quarter centuries of such campaigns have produced mean-spirited personal attacks on candidates, from opponents calling James Madison a pygmy to Southern cartoonists depicting Abraham Lincoln as an ape. George W. Bush joins Dan Quayle and Ronald Reagan in the dunce club, while John Kerry can claim John F. Kennedy and Michael Dukakis as fellow elitist, New England liberals.

The "something more" that Colson senses consists of two elements: 1) an attitude of utter hatred behind the attacks, and 2) a fundamental disregard for the truth. The attacks are more bitter, visceral, and partisan than in former years, and the candidates and their proxies are issuing them in a game of one-upmanship with insufficient concern for their accuracy. It is almost as if both sides have determined that the campaign that strikes last before Election Day will win at the polls, and whether their punches are fair or not matters little. Anything goes for such a prize.

It is ironic that a central issue of the campaign is honesty—both sides have accused the other of lying, resulting in the suffering and death of many: Kerry about Vietnam and Bush about Iraq—yet neither side has qualms about shading the facts to its advantage or lying outright. Spin is in, and perception is everything. Truth does not even enter into this equation. If it does, it is in the form of what the recently out-of-the-closet New Jersey Governor James McGreevey calls "one's unique truth."

However, in today's political world, what is truth to one may not be truth to another. For instance, the Bush administration's truth about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) is totally different from the Kerry campaign's truth. Even though major stockpiles of WMD have not been found in Iraq, enough small finds have been made to allow the Bush team to trumpet their contention that America's attack was justified. Kerry supporters, though, take the exact opposite view, arguing that the little that has been found proves America's war in Iraq was illegal, imperial, unjustified, and rash.

What is the truth? Saddam Hussein had and used WMDs both against Iran and against the Kurds in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Throughout the Clinton administration and into the Bush administration, Hussein made it known that he still had such weapons and had no reluctance about employing them again. He publicized that his scientists were hard at work on delivery systems and new terrors. What he actually had to work with is unknown, but every nation's intelligence of the situation agreed that Iraq was a WMD threat.

Bush acted on this by going to war, believing that removing the threat was vital in winning the War on Terror. In his place, Kerry says, he would not have taken such a drastic measure, believing that further negotiation, continuing the economic embargo, and increasing pressure from a larger coalition would have solved the crisis.

The key to understanding this is that neither side is dealing with the truth but with belief. They have believed something to be true and acted on it—campaigned on it—whether it was true or not. Belief, however, has no foundation without real, authoritative truth. One can believe the moon is made of green cheese all he wants, but such belief does not make it true. In fact, this belief is really folly.

The prophet Isaiah writes concerning the Israel of his day, which parallels the societal state of modern America: "Justice is turned back, and righteousness stands afar off; for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. So truth fails, and he who departs from evil makes himself a prey" (Isaiah 59:14-15). We have come to the point that truth does not matter anymore, which means that justice, righteousness, equity, and goodness are no longer goals people strive to attain. What most people seek is whatever they believe is best for them; this is the new standard of "truth."

Truth, which has "fallen in the street," is the victim of man's human nature running roughshod over everything to get for itself. Who will brave the mean streets to revive it?

Balls and Strikes

When I awoke this morning, I actually remembered my dream. Since that does not happen very often, it seems particularly significant.

I dreamed I was a major-league relief pitcher, called upon in the bottom of the ninth to hold a one-run lead for my team. Strangely, I have no idea what team I was pitching for, but the other team was definitely the New York Yankees. I trotted out to the mound and took my warm-up pitches. As I prepared to face the first hitter, looking in to get the sign from my catcher, my battery mate simply disappeared and so did home plate.

As can only happen in a dream, this did not seem to faze me very much. I wound up and delivered a knee-high fastball directly over where the plate had been. "Ball!" yelled the umpire.

"Whaddya mean?" I shouted. "That was a perfect pitch!" The umpire ignored me, crouching down behind the invisible plate and catcher to judge my next offering. The batter dug in and waited.

Another ball appeared in my glove. Without a plate or a catcher's mitt to throw at, I decided fastballs were my safest bet—a little higher and on the outside corner. The pitch went just where I wanted it to go, and the batter laid off. "Ball two!"

"You've got to be kidding!" I said, standing in front of the mound with my hands outstretched. "I can't throw a better pitch!"

"Play ball!" shouted the ump. Discussion over.

The thought went through my mind that, if I threw another fastball over the non-existent plate, the batter would jump all over it. I needed to throw an off-speed pitch to cross him up. I can throw a pretty good knuckleball, so that was my next pitch, low and inside. "0 and 3!"

I exploded: "How am I supposed to pitch without a plate and a catcher? How am I supposed to know where to throw the ball if I have no target? How am I supposed to know where your strike zone is if there's no plate?" The umpire just shrugged and crouched.

This time I just threw the ball in without even trying to put it any particular place. "Take your base!" said the umpire, pointing down the first-base line. The batter trotted that way.

"Every one of those pitches was a strike!" I told him. "And you know it."

"Yeah?" asked the umpire. "I can call your pitches anything I want." And I woke up—very frustrated.

Mulling this over as I lay there, it occurred to me that a similar frustration must be nagging a great many people in this world. In America, the "plate" has disappeared and so has the "catcher." Our "pitches" are being flung without a standard to judge them by. The "umpire," without a guide to base his judgments upon, capriciously calls them however he likes, and there is no standard by which we can effectively disagree. It is just his word against ours.

This nation used to have a fixed moral standard, the one found in the Bible. Beyond that, we had the Constitution and Bill of Rights and English common law, both based on biblical principles, to fall back on. Somewhere along the line, these have fallen into disuse, forgotten in the rise of liberal ideas such as humanism, relativism, diversity, socialism, multiculturalism, feminism, and a host of other isms that aim to replace our Christian heritage with modern philosophies.

Now we are all on our own. Each person decides for himself what is right and wrong, no matter what his viewpoint or experience. Society, for the most part, is willing to let this occur, as long as nobody gets hurt, and then when someone does get hurt, the judicial system rarely solves the problem. It just locks the offender up for a time, and all is thought to be well.

This has been tried before and failed. The book of Judges twice indicts Israel for just this problem: "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes" (Judges 17:6: 21:25). What the book shows is the depths to which that culture sank when no common standard—no home plate, if you will—guided its beliefs and decisions. It is long past time when the decent people of this nation should have demanded a return to Christian standards. If we do not act now, we may never have another chance to act this side of something far worse.

We Are NOT Alone!

Fans of The X-Files cannot help having seen the poster on Fox Mulder's FBI office wall that proclaims, "We are not alone." For Christians, this is absolutely true—and reassuring! As Mulder would say, "The truth is out there."

A Christian's primary source of truth is God Himself, as revealed in the pages of the Bible. From it, we glean the knowledge of what God is doing, what part we have in it, and where it is all headed. We combine this with facts and observations from our lives, the natural world and history, and the sum of this information forms our beliefs. These, in turn, determine our conduct.

Maybe the most fundamental belief that we produce by this process is the conviction that God is. We come to believe that He not only lives but is also active in His creation and particularly in our lives as called-out Christians. Without this conviction, nothing else matters! To a Christian, if there is no God, the past is a lie, the present is futile, and the future is hopeless!

Most of us rarely ponder how others approach life, certainly not those who have rejected God. Yet they face life believing they came from nothing and are charging toward similar nothingness. This nihilism produces existential behavior, that is, living for the moment because they exist now, having no hope or guarantee of existence in the future. In addition, such people feel accountable to no one but themselves or possibly the state—but certainly not to any Divine Judge who will render to them according to their deeds (Psalm 28:4; Isaiah 59:18; Revelation 20:12).

What happens, though, when their lives begin to unravel? To whom do they turn when relationships sour or employment vanishes or disaster strikes? Some may recant their atheism and "find religion," but many are so jaded against spirituality of any sort that a god of any kind is abhorrent to them. Do they lean, then, on psychiatry? Science? Medicine? Law? Government? In reality, each of these human pursuits is as insubstantial as a hologram. In the end, the atheist stands alone.

Both Paul and Peter tell us bluntly that our trials and tests are things "common to man" (I Corinthians 10:13; I Peter 4:12). We struggle against the same forces that others do. A poor economy, a war, a natural disaster, an oppressive government, a crime wave, etc., hits us just as it hits others, more or less. The similarity ends there, however. A Christian's approach to his problems—in terms of their purpose, solutions and products—is far different than an atheists, or anyone else in the world, for that matter. True Christians see every circumstance as preparation for God's Kingdom and thus worthy of a Christlike course of action.

Paul says God does not give us tests beyond our abilities to solve, and in addition, He opens a "way of escape" from them (I Corinthians 10:13). These are wonderful assurances in themselves, but we can be confident of something even better: God's presence with us—indeed, in us!—as we face our trials. We are not alone! God is there to provide "mercy and . . . grace to help in time of need" (Hebrews 4:16). Later, Paul writes, "For He Himself has said, 'I will never leave you nor forsake you'" (Hebrews 13:5). Thus, Peter advises, "[Cast] all your care upon Him, for He cares for you" (I Peter 5:7).

Jesus tells His disciples, including us, "I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:20). Through Isaiah, He comforts us: "Fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you, yes, I will help you, I will uphold you with My righteous right hand" (Isaiah 41:10). Trials, temptations, tests—what are they next to the willing power of God?

Remember, we are never alone! God is there (Psalm 23:4)! Call upon Him while He is near (Isaiah 55:6)!