SPIRITUAL PERSPECTIVES


WITCHCRAFT DEFENDED; THE BIBLE ATTACKED

GARY W. SUMMERS

   
Nothing gets by the American Civil Liberties Union. If there is any anti-Christian cause to champion, they are eager to charge in, like a junkyard dog sensing trespassers. Their latest client is an incensed high school student with apparently too much free time on her hands. Crystal Siefferly says her religious freedoms are being trampled into the dust because she cannot openly wear a pentagram necklace, which the school has barred, along with symbols of white supremacy groups, gangs, and various Satanic images (Denton Record-Chronicle, 2-10-99, p. 6A).

One of the reasons public education continues to decline is that frivolous lawsuits like these have forced parents into putting their children into private learning institutions or joining the legions of home schoolers. Many have grown weary with school policies being set by radical groups like the ACLU; they wish to return to some semblance of sanity.

"Christian students can wear crosses, and Jewish students can wear stars of David, but Wiccans can't wear the pentagram," whined the ACLU spokesman, as if the founding fathers had such nonsense in mind when this nation was founded. If Crystal were living under the law of Moses, she would legally be put to death. She has the liberty to be a witch and remain alive, but that's not good enough. No, like the homosexuals, she wants to flaunt it in everyone's face. She wants public approval for something that the Bible condemns in the New Testament, as well as in the Old. Sorcery is a work of the flesh (Gal. 5:19-21); sorcerers shall have their place in the lake of fire (Rev. 21:8).

"To be forced to conceal one's religious symbol under one's shirt is a feeling of shame," Crystal opines. She is apparently unaware that displaying it in public would bring shame, too, if she had any sense of propriety. Anything Satanic stands opposed to goodness, God, and decency. Oh, sure, she would probably argue that there is good witchcraft and bad witchcraft and that she is one of the good kind. The Scriptures do not agree with this kind of hocus-pocus.

What good have any witches ever done? Whose life has been enriched and made better because of this ancient superstition? Since the Bible condemns the practice, they are not going to be friendly toward it or follow its teachings. They do not contribute to the betterment of society, and they harbor the potential of doing much harm. They certainly left MacBeth in the lurch.

People do not particularly appreciate seeing symbols of horror and death. If schools can outlaw the wearing of swastikas, they certainly have a right to ban Satanic symbols. If they want to eliminate stars of David and crosses, that would be fine, also, though these symbolize the rich spiritual heritage upon which this nation rests. Christians could best honor their Lord--not by wearing a symbol--but by being pure in heart (1 John 3:3), speaking things which edify instead of being guilty of corrupt communication (Eph. 4:29), dressing modestly, instead of the way the world does (Rom. 12:1-2), and participating only in wholesome activities. No one will bar a good example or a shining light. Now how will the witch manifest herself without a symbol?

The Bible Is Barred

While the ACLU is busy helping their witch friends, a rapist's "51-year prison sentence has been overturned on appeal because the judge turned to the Bible while deciding punishment" (Denton Record-Chronicle, 2-19-99, p. 8B). How horrible--to quote the Bible! In determining the rapist's sentence, the judge read from Matthew 18:6: "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea." The reason the judge quoted this verse was that the defendant had molested his fiance's 8-year-old daughter.

The appeals court ruled that the convicted rapist can seek a lesser sentence since that verse was cited. Let all judges take note. You can probably use a Ouija board to determine a sentence--or the daily lottery number, or a dart board ("Sorry, the dart just missed the 3; you get 17 years"). Probably a judge could even consult the high school wiccan queen for a recommendation, and nobody would complain (least of all, the ACLU), but the Bible? We are too civilized to be influenced by anything God might have to say on a subject.

Our already failing justice system keeps finding ways to take steps backwards. The rights of law-abiding citizens continue to lose ground in the wake of laws that overly protect the guilty, who oftentimes run roughshod over the innocent. December's Reader's Digest contains an article about the way witnesses are intimidated because of the law that says the names and addresses of witnesses who will testify must be given to the defense attorney (86-91). Recently a boy and his mother were shot to death in Massachusetts once that information was given out by a judge, but in Florida it is a state law. Small wonder that people refuse to testify.

So a judge cannot ponder the Scriptures before sentencing someone. How long will it be until someone realizes the Bible condemns stealing and murder? Should we overturn all of our laws against those crimes because they are in the Book? Or should criminals only be set free or resentenced because an attorney mentions a Biblical reference? Would the same attitude prevail if someone cited Shakespeare, Locke, or Gandhi?

When law becomes so perverse as to champion the devil and rebuke God, it is no wonder that people lose confidence in the system and balk at serving on juries ("May I be excused due to this hangnail?"). Which of our founding fathers would have ever dreamed that a child molester could appeal for a reduced sentence because the judge quoted from the Bible? In the Old Testament a rapist would have been put to death. Although we are not under the Old Testament, that penalty still seems appropriate--especially for the gutless wonder who would attack an 8-year-old.

Abby: God Belongs in the Dark Ages

Another attack upon God and the Bible came from "Dear Abby" in her February 3rd column. Here are her exact words:

Being gay (or straight) is not a matter of choice. People who do not know this belong in the dark ages (Denton Record-Chronicle, p. 17A).

Apparently, Abby is not aware that all homosexuals do not agree with her; many proudly pronounce that they are homosexuals by choice. Furthermore, if homosexuals were such by birth, is the same true of bisexuals? And what about those who practice bestiality? Are they that way by birth? Or just consider plain, old-fashioned adulterers: are they that way from birth, too? And what about the child molester previously mentioned? Perhaps it is by birth, not choice, that he is attracted to 8-year-olds.

There has never been any concrete evidence that anyone is homosexual by birth rather than choice. Abby is a victim of the new "dark ages" dominated by political correctness. And if her assertion were true, it would prove that God is incorrect. When He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their homosexuality, did He fall victim to Dark Age thinking? It seems unlikely since the Dark Ages were 3,000 years yet in the future.

When He commanded homosexuals to be put to death (Lev. 20:13) as part of the Law of Moses, was God wrong? Did he not possess Abby's "wisdom" and modern enlightenment?

When Paul called the practice vile and against nature (Rom. 1:26), was he inspired of God? Or was the Dark Age mentality already creeping in? When Paul observed that some in Corinth had repented of homosexuality (1 Cor. 6:9-11), was he unaware that people (allegedly) cannot change what they are by birth?

Abby has clearly overstepped her bounds in this latest pronouncement. If she is going to be arrogant enough to disagree with God, she ought give a little more evidence (it will make good practice for her for the day of judgment). In her column she frequently talks about such noble concepts as love, respect, and responsibility, which are all important and valid precepts. But the same God who commands love condemns homosexuality. No one has the right to select the things with which they agree concerning God and denounce those things with which they personally disagree.

It would be nice if Abby received a lot of mail from her readers protesting her insulting remarks against God and the Bible. She has perfect liberty to defend the perversion of homosexuality, but when she attacks God and His word, her "wisdom" has exceeded her grasp. An apology is in order.

*Send comments or questions concerning this article to Gary Summers. Please refer to this article as: "WITCHCRAFT DEFENDED; THE BIBLE ATTACKED (3/21/99)."


Return To Article Index