The 10 Commandments for the Modern World | The Seventh: “Marriage and Sex are Sacred” - Ben

You shall not commit adultery.

Exodus 20:14 (ESV)

After speaking about the sanctity of life in the sixth commandment, the Lord talks about the sacredness of marriage in the seventh: "You shall not commit adultery." And it is appropriate that this next word in the Decalogue comes in between the one regarding murder and before the one regarding theft. After all, adultery destroys a marital relationship like murder kills a life and steals away a person's intimacy with their partner, just like a thief steals a purse. And, in extreme cases, the three go hand-in-hand (cf. 2 Sam. 11:2-4).

Admittedly, very few people need to be told that adultery is wrong (cf. Gen. 20:9). So the seventh commandment isn't so much an effort to stem the tide of sexual infidelity but a commentary on the importance of sexual fidelity. In other words, God is highlighting how much value he puts on sex and marriage.  

Marriage isn't a communal affair but one of exclusivity. The seventh commandment elevates marital unions far above our base desires so that even though we may be tempted to go astray (cf. 1 Cor. 10:13), we refuse to do so because the vow we made to our spouse in the sight of God is far more important than the feelings we might have towards some would-be adulterous partner.

Scripturally, there are two types of adulterous acts. The first is adultery that takes place in the bed, and the second is adultery that takes place in the heart. The former is a sin involving the body, and the latter consists of the mind. Doubtless, both body and mind are active agents in adultery of any kind. However, as you'll see, the Bible clearly distinguishes and correlates the two. So it is helpful in our discussion to think of them as two separate but, also, interconnected things. 

In regards to adultery that takes place in the bed, that act is the disfigurement of something unique, as if one were to deface the Mona Lisa. In marriage, a person leaves behind their old life to form a new life with their new husband or wife. Just as the priority of the parents' is replaced by their child's new spouse (cf. Gen. 2:24), no one is allowed to hold a place of honor and affection other than a person's spouse. Marriage is something special and not to be interfered with by any kind of adulterous act. As the parents respect their child's new marital status, everyone else does as well. This is why the ring, while having no scriptural basis, is a fantastic and elegant tool to let everyone know that someone is taken and, therefore, unavailable. Thus, when a married person sleeps around, they are treating marriage as a trivial thing when it is the exact opposite of trivial. It is precious, invaluable, and sacred. 

Furthermore, marriage is not only a union made between two people but a union made between two people in the sight of God. Adultery breaks down the relationship between husband and wife and destroys an adulterer's relationship with God. This sin of adultery is not only a sin against one's spouse; it is a sin against one's God (cf. Gen. 39:9; Psa. 51:4; Mal. 2:13-16; 3:5).  

So egregious was adultery to God that he would liken it to idol worship (cf. Jer. 3:8-9; Ezek. 23:37; Hos. 4:13-14; Isa. 57:3). Meaning that marriage itself is a metaphor for our relationship with God (cf. Jer. 31:32; Eph. 5:22-33). In the same way that we would go after false gods seeking fulfillment, an adulterer will go after a false lover seeking satisfaction from them. In both cases, these actions are unequivocally wrong, and, in both cases, these actions are unequivocally unfulfilling.  

But the seventh commandment prohibits more than just physical acts; it also forbids acts of the mind. Even to look at another person with illicit motives is considered adultery in God's eyes.

Matthew 5:27-30 (ESV)

27 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.  29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.  30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

Notice that Jesus puts the emphasis not on the object of a person's lust but on the person who is lusting.[1] If someone lusts after another person, that sin is not laid at the feet of the person they were lusting after but at the feet of the person who did not look away.[2] This is not to say that we shouldn't be mindful of our dress. Modesty is one of the primary marks of holiness (cf. 1 Pet. 3:1-6). If our attire causes another to stumble, we ought to modify that dress to better reflect a concern for those around us and our devotion to God (cf. Mat. 18:7-9: Mar. 9:42-48). Though, to be sure, this can be taken to an extreme.  In the Middle East, for instance, women cannot be seen in public without wearing a burka in which they're covered from head to toe. This takes modesty too far. However, the point Jesus makes is that even if a person were to be dressed immodestly and someone were to lusts after them, those who look and keep on looking are at fault. The loose morals of another are not a reason for us to loosen our own morals. A bad situation does not excuse us from making good decisions. 

To be clear, when Jesus says, "looks...with lustful intent," he isn't talking about mere attraction.[3]. Acknowledging that a person is beautiful or handsome is not a sin. The Greek word used is ἐπιθυμέω (ep-ee-thoo-meh'-oh), and it refers to when a "looking" turns into a "gazing," recognition turns into affection and observation into appetite.[4] Literally, it means "to look deliberately at a woman lustfully, i.e., desiring or imagining a sexual relationship with her…." [5] Thus, the Lord is speaking very specifically about a kind of "looking" that is lewd and lecherous. It is not the sort of looking where someone notices that a person is good-looking; it is the sort of looking where they are looking to satisfy some base desire.[6] Every adult knows the difference between noticing someone and undressing them with their eyes. This is the kind of gazing that Jesus is referring to. It is a looking not with the eyes but in the heart.

To say that even a lustful look is adultery may seem extreme. But just as he did with anger (cf. Mar. 5:21-23), the Lord highlights the actual cause of all affairs: lust. Lust is an act in the heart in the same way that adultery is an act in the bed. To open the door to the former is to expose yourself to the possibility of the latter. Anyone who keeps themselves from a lustful gaze will be impervious to adultery (cf. Job 31:1; Pro. 6:25). It simply will not happen if the gates of our heart are closed to such visitors. But should we open those gates and invite lust in, it will not take long before we find ourselves doing what the heart has already imagined. 

Obviously, this has application to all sexual sins—i.e., premarital sex, fornication, homosexuality, bestiality, prostitution, etc. Participating or engaging in any of these acts is morally wrong under every conceivable scenario. However, in the world of social media, this also has application for those who scroll Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Ticktock, and whatever else comes next. Too often, the selfie is not a means to capture a moment but to flaunt one's sexuality. We post pictures of ourselves not to immortalize a memory but to be seen. We want the clicks, likes, and hearts, and sadly, we'll show increasingly more skin because we know that's what gets the attention we think they want. 

But imagine, for a moment, that every view or heart occurred in real life and in real-time. Like, if you were to go out tanning on the beach and someone came along and just gave you a thumbs up and then didn't go away. Rather than walk away, they sorta stopped and stared at you for a long while. It would, rightfully, creep you out. And suppose that it wasn't just one person but 10 or 20 or 50 or however many likes you would've gotten for a picture like that with each person just standing there on the beach, ogling you with their thumbs up.  If it makes our skin crawl to think of this happening to us in real life, why do we readily post such things on our feeds?

Before we get too bogged down in my hypothetical, let me be clear: not all likes, hearts, or whatever represent people who are lusting. That's not the point I'm making. The point is that in our digital spaces, we've made ourselves readily available for anyone to take our image and do with it as they see fit. "The heart," as the prophet Jeremiah put it, "is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" You don't need to go to age-restricted websites to view illicit content anymore. It's as easy as scrolling social media. Digital spaces too often become digital playgrounds for our lustful hearts.

This is why Jesus' solution may have sounded extreme when you first read it, but it makes perfect sense in the context of sexual sins. Jesus said, "if your right eye offends you, pluck it out," and, "if your right hand offends you, cut it off." Why? He reasons that it would be better to go to heaven maimed than go to hell whole. If a part of you is prone to wander, it is perfectly reasonable to sever it entirely from your life rather than allow it to remain and cause you to stumble. 

So, was Jesus talking literally here? No. This is a classic case of hyperbole. He is not advising you to cut off your hand just because it reaches for the wrong thing, nor does he want you to pluck out your eye just because it looks too long. Even if you did, you would still have a lust problem because issues of sin are matters of the heart (cf. Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Mat. 15:19).[7] One would need to rip out their heart entirely and be given a new one to indeed be immune from sin's prompting (cf. Ezk. 36:26; Rom. 6:11). 

However, while the Lord is not advising self-mutilation (cf. Deut. 14:1), he is urging us to take extreme measures when it comes to sexual temptations (cf. 1 Cor. 6:18; 2 Tim. 2:22; Col. 3:5).[8] It would be far better for you to go without some T.V. show, movie, or social media platform than it would for you to keep those things in your life and expose yourself to temptation. Jesus may not want you to plunk out your eye or cut off your hand, but he may be telling you to delete an app.[9] Better to experience a little boredom than to get wrapped up in some temptation. 

At this point, you might think, like many before you, that the Bible is restrictive and prudish. But this assumption is wrong. Anyone wanting to see how the Scriptures view this act needs only read the book of Song of Solomon to learn how God celebrates it and encourages sex! The catch, however, is that sex is not open. It is sacred; that is to say, it is set apart, unique, and special and only enjoyed within the clearly defined parameters of marriage.  

Any illicit activity outside of marriage is not only wrong, but it diminishes the act of sex itself. God designed it to be more than just a physical action; it has an emotional and spiritual element. Thus, the intimacy achieved through intercourse is a gift from God meant to reinforce vows and strengthen a marriage. It is a profound "oneness" unlike any other experience. But for us to divorce the sacredness from sex and to invite others into that special space is to reduce this unique gift to mere appetite and thereby make ourselves no better than animals.

Now, I know that when we discuss a topic like this, generally speaking, people will fall into two camps: those who are in profound denial and those who are deeply convicted. To the first group, hear me when I say that all sins have a way of manifesting themselves in due course. What you sow will bring a harvest (cf. Gal. 6:7). You may think you can handle fire, but eventually, you will get burned (cf. Prov. 6:27-33).  

To the second group, to the individual whose been convicted that their past or present actions are sinful, there is hope for the adulterer.  There’s hope for a man like me.  In fact, if there weren't, no one would be safe from judgment because, aside from Jesus, there has never been a person who hasn't fallen due to lustful thoughts (cf. Mat. 12:39; 16:4). Dear brother or sister, read the words of John and be encouraged. 

John 9:2-11 (ESV)

2 Early in the morning he [Jesus] came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them.  3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4 they said to him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery.  5 Now in the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" 6 This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground.  7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." 8 And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground.  9 But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.  10 Jesus stood up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more."

In God's eyes, we are all guilty of adultery. However, for those who repent, there is forgiveness and reconciliation (cf. 1 Jn. 1:8-9). No one is so far gone that they are beyond help. With the Messiah, there is always hope. Jesus loves the adulterer. 

[1] Keener, Craig S., A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, (Grand Rapids, MI; Eerdmans Publishing, 1999), p. 187.

[2] Turner, David L., Matthew, The Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI; Baker Academic, 2008), p. 170.

[3] France, R. T., The Gospel of Matthew,  The New International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI; Eerdmans, 2007), p. 204, "The "woman" in Jesus' declaration is thus to be understood also as another man's wife, and the looking "in order to desire her, "specifically of wanting (and planning?) sexual relations…The focus is thus not (as some tender adolescent consciences have read it) on sexual attraction as such, but on the desire for (and perhaps the planning of) and illicit sexual liaison…."

[4] DeYoung, Kevin, The 10 Commandments, (Wheaton, IL; Crossway, 2018), p. 117.

[5] Hagner, Donald A., Matthew 1-13, The World Biblical Commentary, Volume 33A, (Grand Rapids, MI; Zondervan, 2000), p. 120; Keener (1999), p. 189, "The Greek present text often bears a continuous sense, and probably does so here: Jesus refers not to noticing [author's emphasis] a person's beauty, but to imbibing it, meditating on it, seeking to possess it."

[6] Dickson, John, A Doubter's Guide to the Ten Commandments, (Grand Rapids, MI; Zondervan, 2016), p. 134.

[7] Turner (2008), p. 171.

[8] France (2007), p. 206, "As "removable" parts of the body they [eye and hand] serve to make the point that any loss, however painful, is preferable to the total lostness of geënna [author's emphasis]."

[9] Morris, Leon, The Gospel According to Matthew, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, (Grand Rapids, MI; Eerdmans Publishing, 1992), p. 119, quoting Bruner, "Better to go limping into heaven than leaping into hell." 

The Daily Babel: Things to See and Do on the Journey to Lazarus’ Tomb

 

   Iulii XXV, XXXII AD – Written by Divitiae; Edited by Stephen Sapp

After the passing of our elder brother my four siblings and I decided to take a “bucket-list” trip to see the illustrious tomb of Lazarus. Watching the news of this miraculous event spread so far and wide, we just had to see it! What an exciting journey lay ahead of us…but not in the way any of us thought. 

 

For one, the roads to get there are dusty and long. Tucked within the rich, velvety howdahs on top of our rented camels, we somehow still got dirty. I am not exaggerating when I tell you that I woke up from my mid-morning nap with sand in my eye and one of my brothers actually had a grain embedded in his teeth. Needless to say, if you can’t travel in first-class accommodations like we did, spare your money from this ever-long 20-mile trek through the desert. 

 

When we finally came to the foot of Mount Olives we were surprised at what we saw—a two-and-a-half-mile long mountain ridge that towers over the eastern-side of Jerusalem, or, more precisely, the middle of the three peaks forming the ridge. If this is beginning to sound fascinating, it’s only because I just copied that description directly from a book. (The Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary Scroll to be exact. Page MCCXIX.) 

 

In all honesty, it’s just a mountain covered in olives. We weren’t impressed with it or the pitted fruit growing from its groves.  

 

When my brothers and I finally reached our destination of Bethany we realized the disappointment had only just begun. We got to the celebrated, gray, and cavernous tomb only to find that it was empty. Yes, empty with simply nothing to see. 

 

The rumor is apparently true, and Lazarus really is alive. But just like we are—breathing and such. What’s the big deal? Besides, his name is Lazarus. Can’t help but think of that nasty, sore-covered guy always begging from my late brother.  

 

I sincerely hope my brother is resting in peace, but this Lazarus, like the one he knew, doesn’t impress me at all. It’ll certainly take something more than this to make another trip out here, much less inspire someone like my brothers and I who, to put it humbly, fare sumptuously every day.

 

If you ask me, save your money and your bucket-list trip for something else. 

To think you will be stirred because some guy rose from the dead is, in my opinion, nothing more than a grave mistake. 

"But he said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.' "

Luke 16:31

Miscellaneous: "An Attempt at Screwtape" - Ron

One of my favorite works by C.S. Lewis is his book, The Screwtape Letters. In the book, a high-ranking demon by the name of Screwtape is writing letters to his nephew, Wormwood. Wormwood is a young demon who has been assigned to a specific human soul. The task for Wormwood is to get this soul through life without the person coming to know Christ.

The book is brilliant in the way it manifests the subtle ways that temptation greets us each day. Personally, I think it is a book that every Christian should read. It would be a benefit. I have tried to write one short letter from a similar point of view. The main topic of the letter is about the battle of the heart, but holds true to Lewis’s style of Screwtape being just as easily delighted in tormenting Wormwood as they both would be tormenting the soul of a damned patient in hell.

I changed the gender of all three characters. The names have meaning, and as a homework assignment you can look them up and try to figure out why I chose them. I guess you could say they are Easter eggs. 

A few final thoughts to remember:

• As the book goes on, Lewis writes Screwtape in an increasingly menacing way. I’ve tried to bring out a balance.
• Lewis has Screwtape and Wormwood capitalize references to God – even though the words used are Enemy and the like. I always thought this was a stroke of genius on his part. Although Satan and the demons hate God, they cannot deny His authority.

Here you are, an attempt at Screwtape:

My Dearest Artemisia,

Wars and rumors of war once again plague your patient’s mind. You must attempt to keep them there, lest they journey to her heart. You should know why this is, but based upon your bumbling last letter – so unintentionally full of the gravest mistakes that I nearly delivered it to the tormentors myself – I dare not assume too much. The reason, dear niece of mine, is simple enough, though we cannot understand the connection as of yet. The Enemy has attached the issues of life to the heart. Yes, the heart, that great center of personhood for mankind, is a razor’s edge of a battleground. More than one tempter has lost their patient to the Enemy in that arena. Far better ones than you, even.

As I said, we are not sure of the reasons, but the research department is hard at work. What we know is the gamble. Are you a gambler, my dear? Know the stakes well. What these humans love is what they will do. Their affections drive their thinking. This can be used to our advantage, and sickeningly, to His as well. As much as I hate to admit it, and oftentimes do not, He is just as likely to capture their heart as is the best tempter. Our advantage, of course, is that the whole of our Great Dread Lord’s world system is bent to keep the heart of these humans occupied.

Capture the heart of your patient and she is yours forever. You can fill yourself for quite some time on the mere thought of tearing her flesh over and again. That is as near to a sure thing as you can hope for. But, alas! Too many tempters, fueled by lust and greed, have seen their patient open their heart to the Enemy at the last moment. When that happens, she is gone. And as certain as the delight in her eternal torments are the horrors that await you should you lose her. I will rip and tear you myself should you do, as you know.

By all means, then, allow fears of war to fog your patient’s mind. But do not allow her to bring them to the level of her affections. Confusion is a benefit. Fear is a danger. Though it disgusts me to bow before the Enemy’s adages, we cannot help but admit the damage done to our cause by: “perfect love casts out fear.” Keep your patient’s mind in turmoil over the price of goods and how her weekly earnings stretch more thinly than before, but do not let her dwell long on the plight of those worse off than her. This way leads to selflessness, and what you want, more than anything, is for your patient to be self-obsessed.

I conclude this letter with a warning. Just as the arena of the heart boasts high rewards and great risks, so too does youthfulness. My gravest concern is that you place too much emphasis on the young age of your patient. While her youth makes her flighty, prone to self-consciousness, and gives her a yearning to fit in, there is danger here as well. Remember that the Enemy Himself requires faith like a child. Tread carefully, my dear niece, for whether you succeed or fail, I am,

Ravenously yours,

Contortia

Miscellaneous: “A Sister's Sorrow” – Ben

"Now when Jesus came, he found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb four days.  Bethany was near Jerusalem, about two miles off, and many of the Jews had come to Martha and Mary to console them concerning their brother.  So when Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, but Mary remained seated in the house.  Martha said to Jesus, "Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.  But even now, I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you." Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." Martha said to him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day." Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life.  Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die.  Do you believe this?" She said to him, "Yes, Lord; I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world.""

John‬ ‭11:17-27‬ (ESV)‬‬‬

This passage is part of the story where Jesus raises his friend Lazarus from the dead.  Odds are, you've probably heard it before as it's one of the most well-known in all of the N.T.  And this familiarity works in our favor most of the time.  For instance, we see elements at play that the people in the narrative missed, like how Jesus uses metaphors to project what is about to happen.  But this is also one of those stories which can become a victim of its own fame.  Because it has become so familiar to us, we tend to forget that the people in the story (i.e., Mary, Martha, the disciples, etc.) do not know how it will end.  Consequently, their emotions may not affect us as much as if we did not know that their sadness would soon be turned into joy. 

Here's what I mean. 

Martha gets word that Jesus is close to Bethany, and so she goes out to meet him.  When she finds the Lord, she does not bow before him as her sister will do later (Jn. 11:32); instead, she confronts him with an accusation: "Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died." Most commentators would disagree with me here.  They would argue that this was more of an expression of regret than a rebuke.  But I have a hard time believing those words were not a thinly veiled criticism of the fact that Jesus wasn't present when Martha needed him most.  Had he been, her brother would still be alive. 

But regardless of what you think her tone was in verse 21, the point everyone can agree on is that Martha is very clearly upset.  She is four days into a mourning process that will likely last another twenty-six.  Her sorrow had only just begun.  Now, at this point, we would be tempted to blow past Martha's sorrow to get to the good part.  Because we know how the story will end, we do not want to dwell on the unpleasantness of grieving sisters.  But this is not what John intends for his readers to do.  If anything, he writes more about Martha's and Mary's sorrow than Lazarus' resurrection.  Lazarus doesn't even get to talk, whereas his sisters have two full-blown conversations with Jesus.  Joy eventually does overcome suffering, but not until sorrow has had its moment to shine.  Even Jesus, of all people, is said to have wept (Jn. 11:35)!  John doesn't want us to breeze past this highly emotional moment. 

But why?  Why does the Beloved Disciple want us to dwell on things like sadness, grief, and mourning?  Because Lazarus' resurrection was the catalyst that revealed God's glory (cf. Jn. 11:4).  Jesus even told his disciples that he was glad, yes, you read that correctly, GLAD that he wasn't with Lazarus before he died (cf. 11:15)! How remarkable is that!  Martha was upset with Jesus for not being there, while the Lord was happy!  Not because he enjoyed watching his friends suffer, but because through the resurrection of Lazarus, his follower's faith would be magnified a hundredfold.  He was willing to allow his followers to experience a momentary sadness because the joy they would soon encounter would last for all eternity and, ultimately, outweigh any sorrow they might have felt in the interim (cf. Rom. 8:18). 

And because John is such a good writer, we see the faith of Jesus' followers grow in real-time, starting with Martha.  Though she's dismayed over Jesus' absence, she still affirms her belief in the Lord (Jn. 11:22).  And when Jesus tells her that her brother will "rise again," she does not bat an eye but confirms that she knows this already.  She does not doubt that Lazarus will be resurrected on the "last day." And while, yes, she misunderstands Jesus at that moment (The Lord was not speaking about the last day, but that very day.), it is worth noting that her eschatology was solid.  Indeed, there will be a great resurrection on that last day (cf. Jn. 5:21, 25-29; 6:39-40).  So she was not wrong.  But even when Jesus reveals that he is the "resurrection and the life," that revival is not only something that will happen in the future but is a present reality through him, Martha's faith grows with each new revelation.  Rather than cynically denying what Jesus told her, this grieving sister says without hesitation, "I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who is coming into the world." Amid the worst moment of her life, Martha declares that Jesus—the one she is upset with—is the Messiah, the one and only Son of God, and the one who had been prophesied to come into the world to save it. 

Far from being confused by what Jesus was telling her, Martha was tracking to some extent with everything that the Lord had said.  And her affirmation is what John hopes all readers of his gospel would likewise affirm (cf. 20:31).  The things that the Lord told her have not pushed her away from him, as others have been prone to do (cf. 6:60, 66).  Instead, Jesus' words have drawn her closer and into a deeper perception of who he really is.  The darkest day of her life was not only the day on which her brother would be resurrected; it was also the day of great revelation in her life.  Do you see the point I'm trying to make?  It was through hardship that Martha came to know the Lord better. 

I know that most people do not like the sad bits of a story.  And, when it comes to a movie or some T.V. show, you have every right to skip those scenes.  (I will never rewatch the first ten minutes of Disney's UP again.) But when it comes to the Scriptures, when it comes to something that has eternal value, it is worth slowing down and taking your time as you walk through such passages.  Don't skip to the end.  I'm convinced that Paul's exhortation to "rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep" (Rom.  12:15) has as much application for Bible study as it has for the real world.  Through the sadness of those who've come before us, we can learn what we should do when it is our turn to be sad.

The 10 Commandments for the Modern World | The Sixth Commandment: God is Pro Life - Stephen

Thou shalt not kill.

[Exodus 20:13]

What would you do to protect your child? As a parent, are there any limits to how far you would go if you knew your child was in danger? Isn’t it interesting that no one had to teach us to take the extreme measures we know we’d all take in protecting our children? It seems to almost come naturally.

We look into the face of one of our children and we proclaim, “You have your mother’s eyes.” We hear the never-ending jokes exuding with corniness from our pre-pubescent son and we exclaim, “You have your father’s sense of humor.” For better or for worse, we see ourselves in our own children. They have our DNA. They have our genes. They have what the Bible would call, “our image.” And we naturally and instinctively protect those who bear that likeness—even if it’s only one, solitary person. 

One soul. 

One life.  

From the very beginning, God gifts His image. And, yet He waits until day six of the creation week to do so. He didn’t impart His image to those walking on all fours. He didn’t place it upon those swimming in the seas or majestically taking flight above them. He didn’t engrain it into a plant or tree of any kind either. His image was reserved for something else. He fashioned it into us. 

So God created man in His [own] image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

[Genesis 1:27]

When we consider the command not to kill, we must do so in consideration of God’s image formed into all of man and nothing else. As the story of the world progressed, the image of God continued throughout mankind as well. God punished Adam’s son, Cain, for murdering his brother, Abel, before this commandment was ever etched into stone on Sinai (cf. Genesis 4:10-12). Why? Because, for the very first time, the life of an image-bearer was taken. 

After the Fall in Eden and beyond the Great Flood, animal sacrifice and meat consumption were ordained of God freely, but the taking of a man’s life in murder was never to be condoned. All because it was man that still bore the image of His Creator. 

Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man.

[Genesis 9:6]

            God has always been pro-life. To be sure, the question must be asked, “What about all of those wars He allowed the Israelite army to embark upon in His name?” Certainly, He allowed and even commanded Israel to take part in these and, yet the examples of Rahab in Jericho (cf. Joshua 6:22-25) and Nineveh in the book of Jonah (see below) show us that God offered an escape to those on the receiving end of Israel’s soon-to-be conquest. Notice these words of God Himself in condemnation of Jonah’s pity for a plant not made in the image of God but kept from the people of Nineveh, God’s image-bearers: 

But the LORD said, "You have had pity on the plant for which you have not labored, nor made it grow, which came up in a night and perished in a night. And should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons…?"

[Jonah 4:10-11]

Overall, it would seem throughout Scripture God gave the same level of importance to one image-bearer as He gave to a crowd of them. God is pro-life but most of the time, if we’re honest, we are not. 

Unlike God, we tend to be “pro-lives” instead. Why? Because we have been taught to value numbers, masses, and crowds instead of an individual, a soul, an image-bearer. In a world of viral videos, mega-churches, and mass shootings, what’s the value of one? One soul. One person made in the image of God yet residing in a world of 8 billion people. 

Being pro-life is not the same as being pro-lives. The former recognizes the value of a single person, the latter can easily become more about the mission than the person itself.

In seeking importance in life, we have forgotten the importance of a life. In seeking to amass an audience we have forgotten the individuals unless those individuals help us amass that audience. In seeking fame and notoriety, we have forgotten the individual souls who desire to know us the most. 

Unfortunately, churches are guilty of this as well. Churches have equated a crowd attracted with the blessings of God. With this mindset, the opposite must also be true by implication—a crowd absent equals the absence of God’s blessing.

It is not completely inaccurate to say that God is “pro-lives” for He does love the world that He willingly gave His only Son (cf. John 3:16). But He did this never in disregard for the individual life and soul made in His likeness.

What would God look like if He was strictly pro-lives? Would He have chased Jonah down to be used in His service after his initial disobedience (cf. Jonah 1)? Would He have sent Phillip to the Ethiopian eunuch in the desert (cf. Acts 8:26-39)? Would Jesus have had time for Nicodemus who came to Him by night (cf. John 3:1-21)? Would He have had a “need” to go through Samaria to speak to the one woman at the well (cf. John 4:1-26)? And would He have even cared to convict the hearts of us who didn’t receive salvation in a mass revival or evangelistic service but in the quietness of our own home…alone?

In a society that focuses on reaching the masses may we, as Christians, be the ones concerned for the individual. Based upon the willingness of some these days to put their lives in danger, take the life of someone else, or even that of their own, it would seem when there is no thought for eternity, life itself becomes less valuable as a result. May we be the ones to remind them that it is on behalf of an individual’s redemption that all the Kingdom of Heaven still erupts with joy (cf. Luke 15:10)!

May that be true of our hearts as well—that we would be pro-life in more than just one facet of our beliefs. For when we do so we not only get to the heart of the sixth commandment but to the Very One who gave it as well. 

"Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."

[Luke 15:10]

“I just want to encourage you to remember that the world is full of multitudes of dying people who can only be reached one at a time.”

Calvin Miller