The mayor of a Texas town recently made news and raised some eyebrows when he officially declared 2014, the "Year of the Bible."
So why would the mayor of a city do such an eyebrow-raising thing? He told KDFW-TV 4 in Dallas, "[T]he morality that helped build our country is based on the values that are found in the Bible. And as we look at the problems, maybe we're getting away from those values."
Interesting, in view of some of the other stories making news:
- "Oklahoma expects more marijuana after Colorado legalizes recreational sales"
- "Woman in Indiana cuts man's penis with box cutters after smoking marijuana"
- "The Guardian and the NY Times are pushing for Obama to pardon Snowden"
- "Wealthy liberals fund attempt to unseat Wisconsin governor"
- "Popular Catholic priest found dead in Church Rectory"
- "Arizona father and two daughters found dead in home"
- "Father kills son with ax"
That's just a few.
TRENDING: Jihad against Christians is due to … climate change?
Was it wrong for Snowden to reveal U.S. secrets? Should anonymous wealthy donors band together to unseat a publicly elected official? Is there anything wrong with the father killing his son with an ax? After all, aren't women allowed to kill their children via abortion? Where does one draw the line? Or are there lines to be drawn?
This brings up a couple of interesting questions for me, so hopefully some of the readers will be able to provide some satisfactory answers: 1) Is there any such thing as "right" or "wrong"? 2) How do you determine right from wrong? 3) Finally, who decides?
According to (gasp!) the Bible, there was a time in history "when every man did that which was right in his own eyes" (Judges 17:6). Should we revert to a time when there were no laws governing general behavior and simply allow rampant immorality?
What is morality anyway? A dictionary defines it as the "principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior." So who decides? The one with the most money? The man with the gun? The biggest army?
If we accept the concept of "evolution" (I don't), then where do we get laws and principles to govern human behavior? For example, when a new set of kings depose the reigning kings in a pride of lions for lions to mate, they must kill the nursing offspring of the previous monarch to bring females into season. In wild horse herds, the strongest stallion mates with all the mares. If we, like they, are subject only to the laws of evolution, should not all children of a divorced woman be killed so she can conceive legally? (That's ridiculous, Kinchlow. Women can conceive regardless.) But don't young children have to be supported? (Not if they are dead.) And why not have the strongest men beat up or kill the spouse of any woman they desire and take her?
"No way! We are civilized! We have laws, rules, customs to abide by." Says who? Why is it wrong to murder? Steal? Lie? Commit adultery? Diss parents? Why shouldn't every person have the right to "do that which is right in his own eyes"? Because you disagree with it? Is that what should prevent it? Where is the line drawn?
Could it be that we take for granted the principles built into Western Civilization without being aware of their biblical origins? Have we so "educated" our children and so desensitized society that we are totally unaware of the basis of our morality?
I have a suggested solution. It has been said, "Travel broadens one's perspective," so instead of letting students graduate at grade 12, extend high school to grade 13; however, grade 13 would be spent abroad. They would be sent to countries that do not abide by the principles incorporated into our society and be forced to live under the local customs (and at the income level paid in that country). For example, in Islamic countries, it is permissible to steal from non-Muslims but it is punishable to steal from fellow Muslims. Individuals in our society have value, so single mothers receive benefits. What do single (i.e. unwed) mothers receive as benefits in these countries? What do they pay laborers or the unemployed in China, India, Africa or the Middle East? (Israel excepted).
Perhaps some of the anti-biblical advocates should visit some places where the Bible is not the basis for their culture. (I would even agree to having them visit at government – taxpayer's – expense.)
Just let me say, until you have been where the Bible hasn't been, you don't know what you have or where you are.
Media wishing to interview Ben Kinchlow, please contact [email protected].
|
Â