by Mike Benson

My first tornado was a Technicolor "special effect" on a televised version of the 1939 classic, The Wizard of Oz. The Benson house was still intact, but the movie left me emotionally reeling as a youngster. That dark whirling cloud that flung Dorothy and Toto through the sky haunted my bedtime dreams for years. It just seemed so incredibly real.

Like the heroine of that beloved film, I have often wished that I could "click my heels" and be magically transported back to the more virtuous environment of the early 1960's. Over the past four-plus decades, our nation has been "swept out of Kansas" by the cyclone of moral relativism and summarily dropped into Oz — where nothing makes sense anymore. At least, nothing in terms of moral codes of conduct.

Case in point — homosexual "marriage". Since President Bush's call for a constitutional amendment banning gay unions, thousands of same-sex couples have flocked to California and other such states (e.g., New York, Oregon, and New Mexico) in order to pursue legal sanction for their unholy relationships. One of the more notable examples comes from the media princess, Rosie O'Donnell. She and her girl-friend, Kelli Carpenter, recently flew to San Francisco in order to "tie the knot". In an effort to fan the flames of her agenda, O'Donnell commented, "I think the actions of the president are, in my opinion, the most vile and hateful words ever spoken by a sitting president." She continued, "I am stunned and horrified. I find this proposed amendment very, very, very, very shocking. And immoral..."

Immoral?! Immoral?! Did I miss something here? Exactly when did the statute of limitations expire on the wickedness of this form of fornication (cf. Isa. 5:20)? Brethren, while we have a Divine mandate to extend kindness to every fellow citizen, we cannot and must not — under any circumstances — endorse this course of action.

And why not, you may ask? First of all, because homosexual behavior is contrary to God's will (Rom. 1:26,27; 1 Cor. 6:9,10; Gen. 19:1ff; Matt. 19:4-6). Period. But second, because same-sex unions promote even greater moral evils. For instance, in the event the United States government legally sanctions homosexual "marriage", how can it then deny polygamist marriage too?/1 Think that sounds "out in left field"? Don't believe it for a minute. Study the following excerpt from a Fox News Live broadcast dated February 27, 2004. The discussion was between Family Research Council's Genevieve Wood and radio host "Karel":

WOOD: We discriminate against all sorts of people. We don't let people marry three people, we don't let a man marry two women, or a woman to marry two men and we don't allow group marriages.

KAREL: Polygamy is not on the table here.

WOOD: Yes it will be. My friend, yes it will be...

KAREL: No it will not be. It is an invalid slippery slope argument. That is invalid.

WOOD: That is not true. Let me explain to you why. How would you write a law that only limits marriage to two people? Why would it be just two people? You are discriminating against a group of people out there — and believe me, there are people who think polygamy is a good idea, who think group marriage is a good idea. Granted they are a small minority, but they'll come forward and say "we have a right to get married, too. You are discriminating against us."

KAREL: When they come forward you come back on FOX and you go against them. That is not the issue here.

WOOD: No you come back on FOX and tell them why you would discriminate against them. Because you are basing your entire thing on discrimination.

KAREL: The issue here is whether or not a civil institution — marriage - which has nothing to do with religion and the 2,000 rights granted therein are going to be denied to a group of people based on gender. That Massachusetts Supreme Court says, "No".

WOOD: Why would you deny it to polygamists? Why would you deny it to any other group of people who say it is a civil institution?

KAREL: I am not entering that debate with you because it is not on the table.

WOOD: So, you're okay with polygamy too?

KAREL: I am not going to get into an issue that we are not discussing. We are discussing gay and lesbian marriage, not polygamy. If you want to have another segment on polygamy, great.

WOOD: The American people understand that when you go out and think about redefining the institution of marriage, you have to take the long-term view. This is not just something that we are changing for today so that Rosie can make her statement, or for tomorrow. We are talking about how this affects the culture and how it will impact our laws 30 years from now. The argument that you're making in a court of law would have to stand up for polygamists and anybody else who walked in and said they want to come up with a new definition of marriage. Based on what you're saying, there is absolutely no reason those people should be denied rights.

KAREL: These same arguments were used against women's right to vote, were made against slavery, were made against any great social change in this country. They all screamed slippery slope, slippery slope. This is an institution that already exists. It grants 2000 rights to a man and a woman; it excludes monogamous couples that want to enter it based on gender. Those are the facts. If you would like to argue those facts, then do so.

WOODS: I am happy to argue with them. I am happy to argue. Because you are saying that we are discriminating based on gender, and I am saying that you are suggesting that we discriminating based on numbers. And why so? (Family Research Council, Thursday, March 11, 2004, www.frc.org).

While gay-rights activists flood the airwaves with their vile propaganda, what they're not talking about are the repercussions of their policy. As you can see, they steadfastly refuse to address the subject of polygamy. Why? Because they can't. To be consistent, they are incapable of discriminating against polygamists AND THEY KNOW IT. The reason why you're not hearing the homosexual community talk about this is because it opens a veritable "Pandora's Box" for their illicit cause./2 Same-sex unions legitimize other forms of aberrant, amoral conduct; they usher in even more radical and harmful departures from the biblical pattern of marriage./3

Brethren, "we're not in Kansas anymore." The Wizard of Oz was fantasy, but rampant immorality is an all too tragic reality. Our homes are in danger of being tossed (Eph. 4:14) about by the winds of political correctness. Homosexual marriage runs contrary to all that is right and decent and threatens to destroy the traditional family structure. It is long past time that we individually and collectively stand our ground and voice our opposition to this ungodly movement (Ezek. 33:2-11; Jas. 4:17). "There's no place like home..." (Prov. 27:1; Gen. 2:24).

/1 "Among the likeliest effects of gay marriage is to take us down a slippery slope to legalized polygamy and "polyamory" (group marriage). Marriage will be transformed into a variety of relationship contracts, linking two, three, or more individuals (however weakly and temporarily) in every conceivable combination of male and female. A scare scenario? Hardly. The bottom of this slope is visible from where we stand. Advocacy of legalized polygamy is growing. A network of grass-roots organizations seeking legal recognition for group marriage already exists. The cause of legalized group marriage is championed by a powerful faction of family law specialists. Influential legal bodies in both the United States and Canada have presented radical programs of marital reform. Some of these quasi-governmental proposals go so far as to suggest the abolition of marriage. The ideas behind this movement have already achieved surprising influence with a prominent American politician. None of this is well known. Both the media and public spokesmen for the gay marriage movement treat the issue as an unproblematic advance for civil rights..." (Stanley Kurtz, "Beyond Gay Marriage," The Weekly Standard, July 26, ‘03, Vol. 8, Issue 45).

/3 "Once [our] society is unsatisfied with and abandons God's absolute standards, then it is only a matter of time until we become victims of our own subjective standards. The door has been cracked open with regard to the definition of marriage in allowing homosexuals to marry, so now a polygamist in Utah, who has five wives, is appealing bigamy convictions brought against him on the basis of this court ruling. This man's lawyer is arguing that the decriminalization of homosexual sex is no different than polygamy" (Steve Higginbotham, "Yesterday's Fringe, Today's Center," South Green Street church of Christ Weekly Newsletter, Vol. 23, No. 2, Jan. 12, 2004).

by Mitchell Skelton

When my oldest daughter woke up this morning to get ready for school, she was complaining of a sore throat. It is not like her to want to miss school. She has perfect attendance so far this year. However, this morning she stated that she just did not feel like going. I was able to secure an appointment for her with the family physician first thing this morning and wouldn't you know, it's strep throat. The doctor explained that she would be contagious for at least another twenty-four hours, anyone who comes into contact with her is potentially exposed, bad news for the Skelton household. As we traveled back to our home I started to dwell upon the past twenty-four hours, did I share a drink with her? Have I been exposed to this highly contagious disease?

What about your level of contagion as a Christian? Jesus said that as Christians we should live such lives that we literally "infect" those around us.

"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men. You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven" (Matthew 5:13–16).

While I don't think Jesus had in mind contagious diseases when he was preaching the Sermon on the Mount, he definitely had in mind the principle. A little salt in a pot of beans makes for some very good eating. Jesus said that his followers were to be the salt of the earth. Our lives should be lived in such a way that we make a difference in the lives of those around us. If we are not having that effect then Jesus says we are "no longer good for anything."

Jesus also uses light as an example of contagious Christianity. It doesn't take much of a flame to light up a dark room. Light chases away darkness. When Christians live their lives and spread their influence to the world around them, darkness (evil) is driven away! We don't put our Christianity on display to receive the praise of men, instead we do it so that God will be glorified.

The good news for the Skelton family is that once the antibiotic kicks in then the contagious phase of strep throat is finished. The bad news for Satan is, there are no antibiotics that can "cure" a contagious Christian.

Let us make the effort each and every day to "infect" someone with Christ!

by Jimmy Jividen

Man needs grace. He finds that he is a sinner - one who has rebelled against God's will. He is guilty and lost and can do nothing to save himself. His judgment is damnation without hope.

Grace is the unmerited favor of God. It cannot be earned by good works or bought with money. God unconditionally gave it to man without cost. That is what makes it grace. Paul described it thus:

"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God" (Ephesians 2:8).

Grace is free to man, but it cost God His Son. God loved man even though he was unworthy and sinful. To show that love, he graciously sent Jesus into the world to live as man and die for man. Grace cost Jesus his life. He graciously died on the cross to save man from the punishment that his sins deserved. So, although grace is free, it was very expensive for God.

God's grace has been extended to all men. Does this mean that all men will be saved? Not at all. God's grace is sufficient for all men everywhere - but not all men will receive His grace. A gift of water to a man dying of thirst will not be of any benefit unless he drinks it. Even so, the gift of God's grace will not benefit man unless he receives it. Man is not saved by grace alone, because God does not force His grace upon anyone.

A man can respond to God's grace in two ways. He can receive it in faith and submission, or he can reject it by rebellion and neglect. Grace can be offered to a person, but without benefit because it was received "in vain" (2 Corinthians 6:1).

Why would anyone refuse to receive the grace of God? It is free to all who receive it. However, it must never be used as an excuse to continue in sin (Romans 6:1,2).

Thanks to The Voice of Truth International, Vol 6, page 32

by J. Randal Matheny

The craft of writing has often been used as a metaphor for life. Monica Wood's words led me in that well-worn path today:

"Writing happens sentence by sentence. The joy of creative expression lies in finding not a way, but the way - the only way - to say what you mean."

In the same way, life happens day to day, hour to hour. We live in the present, though not for the moment. The joy of expressing that life in Christ lies in finding not a way, but the way - the only way - to live life as God meant it.

You can't rush life, and although you can and should plan it, you can't foresee or prophesy it, much less control it. God is conducting the universe, humanity, history, time, or whatever name you might give it, to its final goal. As wise souls we go with HIS flow, his direction, his conducting of this orchestra as we navigate the knocks, rocks, and locks of the journey. Ours is not a luxury cruise, but a cargo run.

There are as many ways to live the Christian life as there are individuals, for each person is unique. At the same time, within that uniqueness and individuality, all the diversity of human experience funnels itself through the sieve of meaning in Christ. It all comes together in him. Or as Paul says, God makes everything converge in him (Eph. 1:10).

That Christ-focus sprinkles our daily sun with joy and peace, purpose and success.

Under the one Lord and by the one faith, we discover life as it was meant to be lived. One way, exclusive, narrow, steep, and demanding. The only way across the valleys of despair and over the impossible slopes of human achievement. Christ cuts through the jungle tangle of politics, paves over the quicksands of temptation, and calms the turbulent waters of suffering.

Life in Christ fixes the eye on eternity to give perspective to the present. The overpowering goal of the eternal kingdom infuses NOW with energy and hope.

When the avalanche of daily responsibilities threatens to bury us, a simple word of faith steps in. Jesus teaches us to say, "'Move from here to there,' AND IT WILL MOVE; and nothing will be impossible to you" (Matt. 17:20).

The life that matters doesn't just happen. God makes it happen when we place it, when we deposit ourselves, in his hand to guide us along the one way to our blissful, blessed destination.

"I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me" (John 14:6).

Bible citations from the updated New American Standard Version.

by Emmett Smith

According to Friday's issue of "The Bruin", the UCLA International Institute hosted Peter Singer recently as a guest lecturer. The lecture was derived from his new book, "The President of Good & Evil: The Ethics of George W. Bush". Speaking critically of the President, Singer addressed what he considers, "ethical contradictions", in President Bush's policies.

What business does Singer have discussing Ethics? Well, he's the DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University. His "ethics", however, are far from the mainstream, and when one notes that the mainstream these days is far removed from the Biblical worldview, that's saying a lot. During his criticism of the President's opposition to stem cell research funding, Singer said, "I don't deny that embryos are human, and I don't deny that they're living, but I don't think it makes them, (in Bush's words) 'something precious to be protected'".

Singer's comment on Bush's "simplistic" morality was, "I think he has a ... very literalist reading of what (being) an ethicist requires; it requires a lot more nuance, not just the black-and-white terms of 'good' and 'evil'." The very definition of nuance includes the term subtle. Which brings to mind that Genesis 3:1 refers to the serpent as, "more subtle than any beast of the field".

Yes, the evil one loves nuance. It's of inestimable value in the process of rationalization. Pretty soon, one learns to, "call evil good and good evil" and to "put darkness for light and light for darkness" (Isa. 5:20). Ethics is, by definition, the study of morality. It's too bad Mr. Singer hasn't spent more time studying the Master Text.