by Mike Benson

The names have been changed, but the story is real. Young ladies, please read this thoughtfully and prayerfully. You could be Tracy some day:

"When they first started to date, Grant told Tracy he wanted to be 'just friends'. Tracy was happy with the arrangement. But then, after about a month of going out together, their relationship began to change. It happened slowly and seemed natural enough… Grant first put his arm around her shoulder and kept it there. Later that evening Tracy wondered again what was happening between them when Grant gave her a good-night kiss...the question crossed her mind: Weren’t we going to be 'just friends'? But then, in the warmth of the moment, she put the thought behind her. Within a couple of weeks, Grant’s and Tracy’s physical relationship had moved… They weren’t merely pecking each other on the mouth. Their kisses lingered. And Grant’s hand, which he’d been so careful that first night never to let stray from Tracy’s shoulder, now began gliding down to the small of her back, to her side, to her hips… At the end of a date about seven months into their relationship, he remarked, 'Well, Tracy, I’ve really enjoyed our relationship, but this is going to have to be the last time we see each other for a while. I’ve been seeing Brenda.' 'Huh?!' said Tracy, startled. 'What?! What are you saying?!' 'I told you six months ago that I wanted to be your friend,' Grant pleaded. 'I told you I was making no commitments.' 'No commitments!' Tracy shouted. 'No commitments! You…!' Tears welled in her eyes as Tracy felt the bitter sting of betrayal. How natural and innocent Grant made it sound: 'I never said….' And yet he had, hadn’t he? By his actions" (John Holzmann, Dating with Integrity, 59-60).

Like many of her peers today, Tracy made a costly mistake. She sacrificed her virginity for the companionship of a selfish and immature young man. She may have also relinquished the success of her future marriage by being intimate with Grant. /1

I wish I had a quarter for every tear that has been shed by young Christian women who have lost their purity. Like Tracy, their hearts have been broken, their reputations have been tainted, and the most precious gift they own has been surrendered—not to a loving and devoted husband, but to some self-indulgent interloper (1 Thess. 4:6).

Those of us who counsel try to offer comfort. “God is forgiving” (2 Chron. 6:21; Psm. 25:18; 32:1), we promise. The words are true and need to be internalized, but often they are marginally helpful at best. Words, no matter how well-intentioned they may be, cannot reclaim cherished innocence and virtue.

I appreciate the guidance of one father and how he communicates moral values to his family. Like me, he wants to protect his daughter from the pain and consequences of promiscuity. He writes:

"...Before a young man took out my daughter, he usually would come over for dinner. Before he came I would ask my daughter, 'Would you like to tell him the three nothings, or would you like for me to tell him the three nothings?' Usually my daughter would tell him the three nothings before he arrived at the door. However, that gave me a good opportunity when we met to merely ask the young man, 'I am sure that my daughter has told you about the three nothings.' 'Yes, sir.' 'Good. What are they?' I would ask. 'Nothing below the neck. Nothing comes off. And nothing lying down.' 'Super!' I would reply. 'I just want you to know that I know them. My daughter knows them and [now] you know them'” (Douglas M. Cecil, The 7 Principles of an Evangelistic Life, 125-126).

Young ladies, God’s plan for your happiness requires that sex be kept pure and beautiful (1 Thess. 4:3-8; Gen. 2:24-25; Prov. 5:19-20; Song of Solomon). This doesn’t mean the complete absence or denial of passion, but rather the proper directing of such within the boundaries of a lifelong, committed, Christian marriage (Heb. 13:4).

Can you remember the three nothings? “For this is the will of God, your sanctification, that you should abstain from sexual immorality” (1 Thess. 4:3; cf. 1 Tim. 4:12).

/1 “Couples who strongly believe that sex outside of marriage is wrong are...31 percent more satisfied with their sex lives” (Bethesda Research Group, quoted by William R. Mattox Jr., “The Hottest Valentine,” Washington Post, 1994). “Those who cohabitate or live together before marriage have a 50 percent higher possibility of divorce than those who do not” (M. D. Newcomb and P. M. Bentler, “Assessment of Personality and Demographic Aspects of Cohabitation and Marital Success,” Journal of Personality Assessment 44, 1980, 21). “Researchers at UCLA discovered that not only do those who cohabitate have a higher level of divorce, they are more likely to commit adultery once they get married” (Chip Ingram, Love, Sex, and Lasting Relationships, 2003, 147). A study conducted by the University of South Carolina suggests that those who abstain from sex before marriage have the highest rates of marital fidelity (Ibid). “The introduction of sex in a dating relationship is almost always the ushering in of the breakup of that relationship” (Les and Leslie Parrott, Relationships, 1998, 138).

by Mike Benson

The figures are staggering:

At least 3,300+ homes, 30 businesses, and 700 other structures were charred.

Financial analysts estimate losses to exceed $2 billion.

Thus far, 22 people have perished including one fire fighter, while dozens have been injured.

Over 100,000 people were displaced; thousands were without electricity.

At one time, roughly 15,600 firefighters were on the scene trying to control the conflagration.

More than $9 million was spent each day in fire-fighting efforts. Services included 1,900 fire engines, 203 water trucks, 43 air tankers and 105 helicopters.

Some 800,000 acres of land were scorched. The effort stretched over 180 miles in six counties.

The destructive force of these fires is difficult to grasp. Even those who witnessed the actual loss of life and property found it hard to articulate the magnitude and enormity of the devastation. Entire forests and towns were literally engulfed in flames. In most instances, little was left but glowing embers and white ash.

Just think. A single match—barely three-quarters of an inch in length. A thin piece of rigid paper with a small dab of white phosphorus on the end. But watch what happens when that tiny entity is ignited. Notice how that miniscule spark grows into a flicker, and then into a yellow flare. Then consider the ravages of those eleven fires in the Golden State. Remember the toll in terms of human life. Ponder the scale, if you can, of the damage wrought on citizens across California. Then remember...

The tongue is capable of this kind of ruin and more! The Bible says, “...See how great a forest a little fire kindles! And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity. The tongue is so set among our members that it defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire by hell” (Jas. 3:5b-6). With all of that blackened landscape “burned” into our consciousness by the news media, it’s impossible to miss the James’ point. Despite it’s relative size, an uncontrolled tongue can wreak unimaginable havoc in our lives.

Imagine how many relational ties have been severed because of tactless speech (Prov. 25:20). Imagine how many friendships have ended as the result of gossip (Prov. 11:13; 16:28; 18: 8; 20:19; 26:22; Eccl. 10:20; 1 Tim. 5:13). Imagine how many marriages have been “seared” by hot-tempered and inflammatory language (Psm. 37:8; Prov. 14:17; 27:4; 22:24-25; Eccl. 7:9). Imagine how many congregations of God’s people have split because of lies uttered under the veil of envy (Jer. 5:1-3; 30-31; 9:1-9; Hos. 11:12; 12:1; cf. Prov. 12:22; 16:16-19; Psm. 5:6; Micah 6:13; Eph. 4:25; Col. 3:9-10). Imagine how many sound preachers and elders have lost their influence due to false rumor and slander (Ex. 20:16; Ezek. 22:9; Jas. 4:11-12; cf. Prov. 21:28; Jer. 6:28; 9:4; Ezek. 22:4; Psm. 101:5)./1 Imagine how many new converts have been led from the faith by deceitful and fallacious talk (Psm. 12:1-3; Rom. 16:17-18; Eph. 5:6; Gal. 6:7-10). Imagine how many young women have sacrificed their virginity on the altar of empty flattery (Prov. 26:28; 29:5; cf. Psm. 12:3-5). Imagine how many once-valuable leaders in the Kingdom have been brought low because of arrogant boasting (Luke 18:9-14; 1 John 2:16; 1 Cor. 3:1-4; 13:4; Phil. 2:2-3; Jas. 4:13-17; Rev. 18:11, 15, 19). Imagine how many Christian teens have invalidated their example by foolish and course jesting (Eph. 5:4). Imagine how many tender hearts have been crushed by mockery and ridicule (Prov. 14:31; 17:5; cf. 1 Sam. 1:7; Gen. 21:1; Job 30; Psm. 35:21; 40:15; 2 Kgs. 2:23; Jer. 20:8; 1 Thess. 2:2).

Yes, “the tongue is a fire.” Dear Christian, each of us needs to pause and reflect on the harm our tongue can inflict during a simple conversation./2 Our words are powerful (Prov. 18:21)—they can help (Prov. 12:18), or they can consume. “Where there is no wood, the fire goes out; and where there is no talebearer, strife ceases. As charcoal is to burning coals, and wood to fire, so is a contentious man to kindle strife” (Prov. 26:20-21; cf. Matt. 12:34-37). “An ungodly man digs up evil, and it is on his lips like a burning fire” (Prov. 16:27).

Let me close with an admonition from that esteemed theologian, Smokey Bear, “Only YOU can prevent forest fires.” “Who is the man who desires life, and loves many days, that he may see good? Keep your tongue from evil, and your lips from speaking guile” (Psm. 34:12-13; cf. 1 Pet. 3:10).

/1 Ancient rabbis taught that slander is capable of killing three people in one thrust: the slanderer, the person who listens to and accepts such, and the innocent victim whose reputation is irreparably damaged in the public eye. /2 Timothy D. Hall, “Firestarters,” HEM-Lines, Oct. 30, ’03, Vol. 7, No. 17.

by Mike Benson

Ellis Cowart was an American soldier fighting in World War II. On one occasion, he and his comrades were in the middle of a fierce gun battle against the German army.

"Bullets were flying everywhere; we were in the middle of a crossfire," he said. Suddenly, one bullet hit Ellis in the arm, one grazed his forehead, one hit the edge of his helmet, and one hit him squarely in the chest. As it turned out, Ellis had been keeping a small pocket New Testament in the front bib of his jacket. This little Bible prevented that last projectile from actually penetrating his chest. "The Word" quite literally saved his life. (The bullet stopped in Revelation 17).

Mr. Cowart's experience reminds me of a passage from the Bible. James says:

"Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls" (Jas. 1:21 NKJV).

by Mike Benson

It's difficult not to get discouraged at times about teaching a Bible class, isn’t it? Teaching is one of those spiritual tasks that rarely provides tangible results.

Years ago I had a close friend in Georgia who was a carpenter by trade. On occasion, when the two of us went out driving together, he would slow his truck down, point to some nice two-story house over in an open field and say, “I built that.” He wasn’t trying to brag on himself—that wasn’t his nature; he was simply proud of what he had done and wanted to share that with me because I was his friend. I never said it, but I couldn’t help but feel a certain sense of envy during those tours around Bartow county. After three or four months of labor, my friend could back away and identify what he had accomplished.

Like carpentry, other endeavors produce similar quantifiable results. Those who teach in a secular environment can give quizzes and tests to gauge the progress of their pupils. People who commit themselves to a fitness program are eventually able to see measurable changes in their body and weight. But not so with those of us who are Bible class teachers—we don’t have an apparatus to mark the growth of those entrusted to our care and tutelage.

I appreciate one author’s observations in this realm. He notes:

“We usually try to measure success based on the wrong things. Normally, our natural tendency is to measure our effectiveness on things that we can count or see. We delight in trying to count church membership, converts, or the number of contacts we are able to accumulate. We want to be able to see how many people are now coming to the church as a result of our (efforts). But, 'God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart' (1 Cor. 16:7). We have our focus on the external things rather than on the internal things… That is what I refer to as the widget mentality. Typically in business we measure our output by the number of widgets that we are able to produce. We put raw materials into a big machine, and out the other side come widgets. We are able to count the widgets and therefore we are able to measure our effectiveness. But that does not always work in the spiritual realm (Douglas M. Cecil, “Being Fruitful,” The 7 Principles of an Evangelistic Life, Moody Publishers, 2003, 106).

Those of us who teach a Bible class rarely, if ever, are granted the opportunity to see the actual fruits of our labor. We can’t follow our students at home, in school, or on the job and put a yardstick to their maturation in the faith.

. If a youngster resolves to be more obedient, to cooperate with his or her parents, or to have a better disposition, we may not be able to witness this evolution in character.

. If a teenager decides not to cheat on an algebra exam because of a lesson we taught on honesty, we may never know (this side of eternity) of the silent victory that was won on the battlefield of temptation.

. If a husband and wife determine to work harder on their relationship because of a study we delivered on God’s will for marriage, we may never be made privy to the wondrous transformations taking place in their hearts and house.

Growth (2 Pet. 2:2; 3:18), from our vantage point, is slow and imperceptible.

I’ve come to the realization that Bible teaching is, by its very nature, a long-term investment (1 Cor. 3:9). It’s not just what the kids in our class did or didn’t do last week, but where they will be twenty years from now. And it’s not just where they will be twenty years from now, but where they will be in eternity, and who they will have in-turn influenced for the Lord (2 Tim. 2:2) before the Last Day.

God’s Word produces results. We have that guarantee. “For as the rain comes down, and the snow from heaven, and do not return there, but water the earth, and make it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall My word be that goes froth from My mouth; it shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish what I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it” (Isa. 55:10-11 NKJV). Perhaps those of us who teach a Bible class should focus less on counting widgets and concentrate more on planting seed (Luke 8:11).

by Mike Benson

I am outraged. My anger is due to an affront from within religious academia against our Savior. Dr. Theodore W. Jennings is an ordained minister with the United Methodist Church. He is also a professor of biblical and constructive theology at Chicago Theological Seminary. /1 This past May, Dr. Jennings published a book entitled, The Man Jesus Loved. /2 The title relates only the very “tip of the iceberg” in terms of what the author affirms. According to Jennings:

. Jesus not only condoned homosexual relationships, but He was actually involved in one with John (cf. John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20).

. To exclude people from our fellowship on the basis of their sexual practice is to “distort the Bible generally and the traditions concerning Jesus in particular.”

. There is a preponderance of biblical evidence (especially in the gospel accounts) that endorses same-sex relationships.

Permit me to briefly respond to each of the professor’s assertions. Consider:

1. It is blasphemous to insist that our Lord engaged in any form of fornication. Jesus lived under the Mosaic regime (Gal. 4:4; cf. Luke 2:21ff). He revered, endorsed and perfectly obeyed the law in all respects (John 5:46-47; Matt. 5:17-18; 7:12; 22:36ff; 23:23). /3 How then could He engage in that which Mosaic legislation explicitly condemned (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Deut. 23:17)?

2. The Bible is distorted when men wrench it from its original context. “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures” (2 Pet. 3:16). The Greek word for twist is strebloo (found only here in the NT) /4 and means “to turn from the proper position, to torture, to pervert”. /5 The term refers to a rack that was used by ancients to contort the bodies of prisoners in an excruciating fashion. Jennings has done just that. In order to advance his own immoral agenda (cf. Phil. 3:19), he has violently wrested the Word of God from its original context and forced it to teach things never intended by the sacred writers (2 Pet. 1:20-21). Having fashioned his own hermeneutic, Jennings has taken the Holy One (Mark 1:24; Acts 2:27; 3:14; 13:35; 1 John 2:20) and molded Him into a sexual deviant (cf. Heb. 4:15; 7:26; 1 Pet. 2:22).

But there are implications for that which the professor espouses. The instant one accepts this warped view of the Son of God, he immediately forfeits his salvation. For to portray Christ as anything short of perfect (Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19) is to nullify what He did at the cross on his own behalf (1 Cor. 5:7; Eph. 5:2; Heb. 10:12).

3. Jesus sanctioned His Father’s plan for physical union and intimacy.

   And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ “and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?’” (Matt. 19:4).

   The gospel of Matthew reveals that the divine arrangement for sexual union (i.e., one flesh) since the beginning of time has always been one man for one woman (cf. Gen. 1:27). Any other order is not in harmony with the revealed will of God (cf. Gen. 49:4; Matt. 5:32; Heb. 13:4) and invites eternal judgment (Rev. 2:22; 21:8; 1 Cor. 6:19ff; 2 Pet. 2:4ff).

Not so long ago, any attacks against Christ—but especially like those leveled by Jennings—would have prompted a unanimous outcry from “Christianity” at large. Men would have rushed to the Lord’s defense and upheld His moral integrity by virtue of the revelation of Scripture (cf. Rom. 1:24-27; 1 Tim. 1:9-10; Jude 7). Today, many religionists are not only deafly silent, but in some instances, actually supportive of this so-called “scholarly inquiry into the Bible.” Dear Christian, we simply cannot be so-inclined (Isa. 5:20a; Ezek. 33:1ff). Too much is at stake (2 Pet. 2:2).

/1 www.ctschicago.edu; Chicago Theological is associated with the United Church of Christ.
/2 Subtitled Homoerotic Narratives from the New Testament; ISBN 082981535X /3 Jennings admits that the Old Testament and the apostle Paul condemned homosexuality. /4 Robertson, “The Second Epistle of Peter,” Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. VI, 179. /5 Woods, “Second Peter,” A Commentary on the New Testament Epistles of Peter, John, and Jude, 191.