I recall passing a note to a friend when I was in fifth grade. The words of the text focused on a girl named Lisa who was upset by something or other that my friend had done to her. I don’t remember the specific cause of Lisa’s hurt emotions. What I do remember were these words of mine about Lisa in that note: “She’s so sensitive.”

In my mind, I was simply analyzing her reaction and comforting my friend who had caused the hurt. In God’s correct view, however, I was gossiping.

Aren’t we adept at defining our actions as different from what they really are? As different from how God sees them?

For women, we too often fail when it comes to gossip. We then misappropriate our actions for several reasons.

On the fringes

Curiosity. What a pleasant word to cloak what curiosity often really is: nosiness. For some reason, we want to know what’s going on. We want to be in the know.

Some women possess enough self-control to walk away after hearing juicy nuggets without contributing to the gossip. They believe that they’ve done no wrong since they’ve controlled their tongues. The words they hear do not always disappear, though.

7 A fool’s mouth is his ruin,

   and his lips are a snare to his soul.

8 The words of a whisperer are like delicious morsels;

   they go down into the inner parts of the body.  (Proverbs 18)

Ever eaten something loaded with sugar and/or fat? That large bowl of queso or an extra hefty slice of German Chocolate Cake? Those treats satisfy the taste buds as we consume them, but afterwards they frequently consume us, producing results such as stomachaches, weight gain, binger’s remorse, and even for some the occasional diabetic coma. Curiosity about someone else’s drama functions in the same manner. It enters the ears like a delicious, savory pizza, but then settles in our bellies. It establishes in us the foundation for potential future sin.

Like our food diets, it’s best to control what we intake rather than work afterward to remove the unwanted effects.

But there’s the problem. Unless we exercise our faith consciously upfront, we want to hear the latest news. It’s in our pre-Christ nature to desire it. Worse yet, we give approval to gossip when we listen to it.

28And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.  (Romans 1)

Knee Deep in the “Pick-a-little Talk-a-little”

Women talk. Women connect with each other through communication. It’s how we’re wired, even introverts like me. Given that, we should approach our communication with each other with obedience to God’s commands as our primary aim. We’re commanded to love God first above all else, even before loving others.

Caring

Many women believe that they don’t exhibit a caring nature if they fail to lend an ear to a friend in need of counsel. I agree, yet it behooves us greatly to venture into that counsel with trepidation and caution. Some guiding questions:

• Is our friend authentically struggling or is she gossiping about someone else?
• Are we close enough with this friend that our relationship necessitates that we know our friend’s current trial?
• How deep into the details of the struggle do we actually need to plumb?
• Do we see the outcome of the counsel as leading to healing and closure or does the chat time encourage emotional reactions and intensify/prolong the situation?

At times, caring requires that we shun opportunities to fuel the gossip. At times, our sisters need to hear that we cannot discuss this or that because we want to honor God’s command to not gossip.

5 Better is open rebuke

   than hidden love.

6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend;

   profuse are the kisses of an enemy.

7One who is full loathes honey,

   but to one who is hungry everything bitter is sweet.  (Proverbs 27)

When we concern ourselves with God’s will and feed ourselves with his word and presence, we will not satisfy the flesh. Gossip will not taste sweet to our ears.

Fitting in

Most of us want to belong, to go where everybody knows our name, to know that we possess a group or place in which we feel secure and accepted. Once we’re comfortable, it can be all too easy to succumb to participating in chatter that dishonors God, disrespects our brothers and sisters, and stirs up unnecessary and meddlesome conflict. Proverbs and the Psalms abundantly reveal these truths to us.

17Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own

   is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears.

18Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death 19is the man who deceives his neighbor

   and says, “I am only joking!”

20For lack of wood the fire goes out,

   and where there is no whisperer, quarreling ceases.

21As charcoal to hot embers and wood to fire,

   so is a quarrelsome man for kindling strife.

22 The words of a whisperer are like delicious morsels;

   they go down into the inner parts of the body.

23 Like the glaze covering an earthen vessel

   are fervent lips with an evil heart.  (Proverbs 26)

1O LORD, who shall sojourn in your tent?

   Who shall dwell on your holy hill?

 2He who walks blamelessly and does what is right

   and speaks truth in his heart;

3who does not slander with his tongue

   and does no evil to his neighbor,

   nor takes up a reproach against his friend;

4 in whose eyes a vile person is despised,

   but who honors those who fear the LORD;

who swears to his own hurt and does not change; 5who does not put out his money at interest

   and does not take a bribe against the innocent.

He who does these things shall never be moved.  (Psalm 15)

11 Come, O children, listen to me;

    I will teach you the fear of the LORD.

12 What man is there who desires life

   and loves many days, that he may see good?

13 Keep your tongue from evil

   and your lips from speaking deceit.

14 Turn away from evil and do good;

   seek peace and pursue it.  (Psalm 34)

30The mouth of the righteous utters wisdom,

   and his tongue speaks justice.

31 The law of his God is in his heart;

   his steps do not slip.  (Psalm 37)

19″You give your mouth free rein for evil,

    and your tongue frames deceit.

20You sit and speak against your brother;

   you slander your own mother’s son.  (Psalm 50)

13Whoever goes about slandering reveals secrets,

   but he who is trustworthy in spirit keeps a thing covered.  (Proverbs 11)

28 A dishonest man spreads strife,

   and a whisperer separates close friends. (Proverbs 16)

Read Proverbs 18 and you’ll notice it repeatedly speaks of the fool and his lips.

Additionally, we’re told to choose our friends carefully:

19Whoever goes about slandering reveals secrets;

   therefore do not associate with a simple babbler.  (Proverbs 20)

17Iron sharpens iron,

   and one man sharpens another. (Proverbs 27)

The wisdom of the Proverbs should guide our daily choices and behavior, not only with the brethren but also in the marketplace. Should our coworkers with vitriolic tongues diminish our joy and commitment to following God’s command to do everything for God’s glory? Aren’t we called to be light in the darkness? Aren’t we to live such good lives that the pagans see our good deeds and glorify God?

The Antidote

God, of course.

He will uphold and strengthen us. He will lead us in paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. He will work within us to conform us to his perfect and pleasing will.

Mary and Martha return to my mind yet again. Martha complained about Mary, and Jesus explained that Mary had chosen the best option: being at the foot of our Lord, listening and learning.

Focus on God. Learn from him. Trust him. Follow his ways. He will mold and improve us, revealing to us the motives of our hearts and also our errors.

23Search me, O God, and know my heart!

   Try me and know my thoughts!

24And see if there be any grievous way in me,

   and lead me in the way everlasting!  (Psalm 139)

James said that we cannot tame the tongue, but we can control the situations in which we place ourselves. We can walk out of a room. We can lovingly refrain from participating in conversations that border on slander. We can do all things through him who gives us strength.

Back to Lisa. She found the note that I had written. My best of intentions increased Lisa’s pain. How’s that for caring?

“Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the Lord in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. Numbers 31: 15-18

Most analytic varieties of atheism seem committed to experience, science, and reason as foundations of rational belief. Consider John Shook’s definition of Naturalism, as published on Naturalisms.org:

Naturalism is usually defined most briefly as the philosophical conclusion that the only reality is nature, as gradually discovered by our intelligence using the tools of experience, reason, and science.

As a Christian theist, I’m happily inclined to agree with experience, science, and reason (ESR) as foundations of rationality; ironically, were I an atheist, I might not so eagerly consent—continental philosophy beckons—but that’s another post. For present purposes, Quixote’s wondering why a perennial objection against Christian theism, a subset of the problem of evil which levies charges of wrongdoing against God Himself for ordering genocide, appears to be currently in the forefront of many atheists’s minds.

It’s all over the atheosphere in one form or another. Let’s take a brief look at the genocidal God objection (GGO) in the light of experience, science, and reason.

As far as I know, no one has direct experience of God committing genocide. I’ve never seen Him do it. I think it’s safe to assume no reader or commenter has either. If the objector is willing to grant the accounts of the Old Testament as historical, I say bravo. Let’s admit them as testimonial evidence. But once they’re admitted, let’s not de-admit them once we move on to other topics. At any rate, this does not represent direct experience and does not provide a rational foundation by means of direct experience for or against GGO under ESR.

Science appears to be of no assistance either. We do not appear to have an instrument or experiment capable of measuring the GGO, nor has science provided us with a time machine whereby we might directly observe this phenomenon.

What about reason? This must be the pillar of tripartite naturalistic thought the objection purportedly rests upon. But does it? Is this a logical objection?

I submit that it is not. This objection rests upon emotionalism. It’s an emotional plea, and as such, seems strange coming from the keyboards of atheists. Allow me to explain.

Christian doctrine clearly teaches that humankind in its entirety, save one notable exception, is deserving of death as a penalty for sin. Moreover, Christianity teaches that a holy and righteous God is justified in executing this judgment. From these two premises, and given Christian doctrine as true, logic requires deductively that God is not guilty of injustice, even to the extent of genocide, or in judgment in the form of a worldwide deluge:

P1 Sinners are deserving of judgment, including death.

P2 All humans are sinners.

P3 A righteous, morally blameless judge is justified in delivering judgment to sinners, including death.

P4 God is a righteous, morally blameless judge.

Therefore, God is justified in delivering judgment to sinners, including death.

It’s nearly tautological: If they deserve it, they deserve it. The logic appears impeccable, so given the truth of the premises, the conclusion necessarily follows. Here’s the point then: given the assumptions of Christian doctrine as revealed in the Bible, there’s no logical objection to God ordering genocide, and any rational observer is compelled by formal logic to acknowledge this conclusion, all emotionality aside. Considered purely from within the Christian worldview, the GGO fails logically, and is thus a purely emotional objection, one that does not square with experience, science, and reason.

I fully understand, however, that the Christian worldview is not the only game in town. Those of you who wish to argue that humans are not sinners who deserve death can do so, and create logical syllogisms that prove that the God of the Bible is a homicidal maniac. Fair enough, but that is not the objection I’m treating in this post. This post treats the objection that even from within the Christian’s own doctrine and holy book, God is a homicidal maniac. This is conclusively demonstrated above to be an emotional response, not a logical one, or at best a logical one founded on premises considered false by Christians. Hence, the notion that the Biblical accounts taken in isolation prove God morally culpable for genocide should be rejected by all atheists who wish to rely on experience, science, and reason to influence belief. We can argue later about whether Christianity is true, whether people are actually deserving of death and judgment, and so on, but let’s first settle the question of whether Christianity is internally consistent with regard to the GGO. I submit that it is.

I realize that even within my own argument above I need to address the issues of children, animals, and the means by which God delivers judgment to support the premises of this argument. I intend to do so in subsequent posts on this topic. Furthermore, it remains unexplicated above how God’s acts of ordering genocide are in actuality measures of grace and lovingness on his part—also reserved for a future post.

Now, let’s not shy away from the skeptic’s claim that Christianity is a bloody religion. Let’s not act as though their claim does not have merit. It does…it’s right there in our holy book. Christianity is a bloody religion that has as its cornerstone–its foundation–a bloody act performed by God through the actions of human agents: the crucifixion of Christ. Christian, this is the basis of your atonement: a blood sacrifice, given once and for all for your sin. If you can’t accept it, you can’t be a Christian.

Take a look around and ask yourself if this is a bloody world we live in. Clearly, it is, and non-bloody religions seem out of place in a bloody world, like a man trying to breathe water or a woman that only notices certain aspects of her face in a mirror. Only a bloody religion can make sense of a bloody world–that, or there’s no meaning to the world at all.

“And thus I clothe my naked villany
With odd old ends stol’n out of holy writ,
And seem a saint, when most I play the devil.”

King Richard III (I, iii)

Perhaps I should spend less time involved with Internet discussions. There’s something to be said and learned with respect to the stewardship of time. Nevertheless, I’ve invested the time lately, for good, ill, or both, in discussions with a variety of Christians and non-Christians. There’s a disquieting thread woven through the strands of most every discussion, especially when the topic at hand has religious or spiritual application or import. There’s a universal clothed villainy afoot. It’s systemic, foundational, inherent…

The villainy is the sin nature we inherit from Adam, for In Adam we sinned all.Before I sound too preachy, no non-pelagian Christian–which is simply longhand for all Christians–should struggle to acknowledge the universality of the sin nature. The Bible is overtly clear on this point, and a knowledge of sin is the entry point for Christianity. The Christian church is a unique institution: you’re required to be rotten as a prerequisite for membership. Original sin provides the Christian’s dual understanding of the brotherhood of man, it and creation in the image of God.

So far, so good. However, the problem arises when (read as when, not if) we clothe our villainy. Involve yourself in any Christian forum and see how long it takes to detect the presence of the sinful nature, both in yourself and in others. The insincerities, the taunts, the refusal to cross party lines and admit an opponent’s strengths, the know-it-all-ness, the veiled ridicule, or any other of a truckload of sins. Better yet, just take note of your own thoughts in connection with your Christian brethren. Am I the only one who has such thoughts? I doubt it…The heart is deceitful above all things. Who may trust it?

And yet our villainy is so easily clothed by the anonymity of the Internet. It’s easy enough to fool ourselves, deceiving ourselves that we have no sin. God forbid. May I ever enter church as the tax collector and not the Pharisee.

But I do it, and so do you. It’s foolish. I might as well put a blonde wig on my Great Dane and take her out on a date, daring anyone to tell me she’s a dog. Nonetheless, that’s what we do. We dress up our sin nature and pass it off to the world as inner beauty. O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

In speaking with non-Christians, my experience is that the sin nature represents one of the top two or three stumbling blocks to reasonable communication with the modern non-Christian. The presuppositions from both sides concerning the inner nature of humans are so vastly disparate that it presents an immediate roadblock to discussion about God.  There was presumably a time when non-Christians recognized the sinful nature, but that time is by and large a thing of the past. Today’s non-Christian is a flasher; his villainy is clothed, but he’ll be happy to open his trench coat at any time, because, in his mind, there’s nothing to hide.

Most disturbingly, we as Christians, as King Richards, clothe our villainy with odd old ends stol’n out of holy writ.I tangled recently with some holiness folks preaching sinless perfection. While I appreciate the call and emphasis on living a good Christian life, to say that we are perfect in our sinlessness is the height of clothing our villainy. Unless, of course, we think we are Christ himself, or better than the Apostle Paul:

¹⁴For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. ¹⁵For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. ¹⁶If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. ¹⁷Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. ¹⁸For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. ¹⁹For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. ²⁰Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. ²¹I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.²²For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: ²³But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. ²⁴O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? ²⁵I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Naturally, the forum was overflowing with clothed villainy, and it pains me to think that Christ was watching his followers represent him so. Yes, we so often seem the saint, when most we play the devil. May God have mercy upon us all, giving thanks to Him for 1 John 1:9, and the fact that Romans 8 follows Romans 7.