The Religion That Started in a Hat

Images and Worship a primer By Jack Kettler

Images and Worship, a primer. This brief study will look at images of God in Worship, images to enhance Worship, images, and art that would distract from worship. In addition to its brevity, this primer is designed to provoke thought and discussion.

As in previous studies, definitions will be looked at along with scriptures, commentary evidence, and confessional support for the purpose to glorify God in how to live.

Images of God in Worship:

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, (temuna) or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them …” (Exodus 20:4 ESV)

Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance

“image, likeness, similitude

Or tmunah {tem-oo-naw’}; from miyn; something portioned (i.e. Fashioned) out, as a shape, i.e. (indefinitely) phantom, or (specifically) embodiment, or (figuratively) manifestation (of favor) – image, likeness, similitude.”

Therefore, watch yourselves very carefully. Since you saw no form on the day that the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a carved image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female…” (Deuteronomy 4:15-16 ESV)

What is a graven image?

It is a carved idol or representation of a god used as an object of Worship. An image would include pictures.

From Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament on Deuteronomy 4:16:

“In the words, “The day (היּום, adverbial accusative) “that thou stoodest before Jehovah thy God at Horeb,” etc., Moses reminds the people of the leading features of those grand events: first of all of the fact that God directed him to gather the people together, that He might make known His words to them (Exodus 19:9.), that they were to learn to fear Him all their life long, and to teach their children also (יראה, inf., like שׂנאה, Deuteronomy 1:27); and secondly (Deuteronomy 4:11), that they came near to the mountain which burned in fire (cf. Exodus 19:17.). The expression, burning in fire “even to the heart of heaven,” i.e., quite into the sky, is a rhetorical description of the awful majesty of the pillar of fire, in which the glory of the Lord appeared upon Sinai, intended to impress deeply upon the minds of the people the remembrance of this manifestation of God. And the expression, “darkness, clouds, and thick darkness,” which is equivalent to the smoking of the great mountain (Exodus 19:18), is employed with the same object. And lastly (Deuteronomy 4:12, Deuteronomy 4:13), he reminds them that the Lord spoke out of the midst of the fire, and adds this important remark, to prepare the way for what is to follow, “Ye heard the sound of the words, but ye did not see a shape,” which not only agrees most fully with Exodus 24, where it is stated that the sight of the glory of Jehovah upon the mountain appeared to the people as they stood at the foot of the mountain “like devouring fire” (Deuteronomy 4:17), and that even the elders who “saw God” upon the mountain at the conclusion of the covenant saw no form of God (Deuteronomy 4:11), but also with Exodus 33:20, Exodus 33:23, according to which no man can see the face (פּנים) of God. Even the similitude (Temunah) of Jehovah, which Moses saw when the Lord spoke to him mouth to mouth (Numbers 12:8), was not the form of the essential being of God which was visible to his bodily eyes, but simply a manifestation of the glory of God answering to his own intuition and perceptive faculty, which is not to be regarded as a form of God which was an adequate representation of the divine nature. The true God has no such form which is visible to the human eye.” (1)

Making images of God are forbidden in all forms.

What about pictures of Christ, are they forbidden?

Images of Christ by James Durham

“And if it be said man’s soul cannot be painted, but his body may, and yet that picture representeth a man; I answer, it doth so, because he has but one nature, and what representeth that representeth the person; but it is not so with Christ: his Godhead is not a distinct part of the human nature, as the soul of man is (which is necessarily supposed in every living man), but a distinct nature, only united with the manhood in that one person, Christ, who has no fellow; therefore what representeth him must not represent a man only, but must represent Christ, Immanuel, God-man, otherwise it is not his image. Beside, there is no warrant for representing him in his manhood; nor any colourable possibility of it, but as men fancy; and shall that be called Christ’s portraiture? would that be called any other man’s portraiture which were drawn at men’s pleasure, without regard to the pattern? Again, there is no use of it; for either that image behooved to have but common estimation with other images, and that would wrong Christ, or a peculiar respect and reverence, and so it sinneth against the commandment that forbiddeth all religious reverence to images, but he being God and so the object of worship, we must either divide his natures, or say, that image or picture representeth not Christ.” (2)

Pictures of Christ by Loraine Boettner

“Closely akin to the use of images is that of pictures of Christ. And these, we are sorry to say, are often found in Protestant as well as Roman Catholic churches. But nowhere in the Bible, in either the Old or New Testament, is there a description of Christ’s physical features. No picture of Him was painted during His earthly ministry. The church had no pictures of Him during the first four centuries. The so-called pictures of Christ, like those of Mary and the saints, are merely the production of the artist’s imagination. . . . No picture can do justice to his personality, for he was not only human, but divine. And no picture can portray his deity. All such pictures are fatally defective. . . . For most people the so-called pictures of Christ are not an aid to worship but rather a hindrance, and for many they present a temptation to that very idolatry against which the Scriptures warn so clearly.” (3)

In light of the above, it can be said:

1. Pictures of Christ have no semblance to the way He actually looked. Christ’s glory cannot be captured in a picture, so they are necessarily inaccurate and false.

2. Since no one knows what Christ looked like, all pictures of Him are necessarily false.

3. Furthermore, since an imaginary picture of Christ cannot capture His deity, they are false.

The “Iconoclastic Council,” of 754 decreed that because Christ is God and man in one Person, it is not possible to make a true picture of Him, and thus that all pictures of Christ are idolatrous, whether venerated or not.

What about images of saints to enhance Worship? Can this be justified?

“…beware lest you act corruptly by making a carved image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female …” (Deuteronomy 4:16 ESV)

In some churches, you find statues or pictures of Mary, Joseph, and the Apostles. The churches that have statues usually hold to the doctrine of special sainthood of the apostles and others. Prayers asking for intercession are offered to these special saints. From one Roman Catholic website, it says, “Praying to the saints is praying to God, in a fundamental way.” This website goes on and says, “The authors of the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium (“light of the nations”) noted that it was important that we “suppliantly invoke” the saints and “have recourse to their prayers…”

Prayers for the intercession of the saints is a doctrine also held by the Eastern Orthodox Church. Eastern Orthodox Churches do not have statues. Instead, they use pictures called Icons, which are supposedly windows into heaven.

Do statues and pictures of the special saints used to facilitate divine intercession fall under the condemnation of Deuteronomy 4:16?

To answer this question, consider:

The Church of England’s “Thirty-Nine Articles” denounce the “invocation of saints” as “a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God” (Article XXII).

In answer to the question, yes pictures and statues that aid in or facilitate prayers to God or the saints violate Deuteronomy 4:6.

Can a church have pictures and statues not of God for decoration similar to stained glass windows or stylish carpets? Possibly, but the consideration of distraction from the preaching can be a real danger. Ugly carpeting and stained glass windows while not forbidden can be causes of distraction. If not for Worship, why there be a statue or picture of a saint placed in the sanctuary?

Are there Scriptural approved visual representations for Worship?

The sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are visual representations of the gospel.

Can images and art distract from Worship? The danger of emotional experience:

Art and music can most certainly stimulate emotions. Emotional stimuli is not necessarily bad. However, do intensified emotions indicate something spiritual is happening? Not necessarily. Can emotions be confused with the movement of the Holy Spirit? Is so, then there is a danger of outside stimuli that can move the emotions and be confused with the work of the Holy Spirit?

Consider the dangers of visual stimuli in Worship:

“To my mind this means that we should avoid introducing other media in our sermons. If we are tempted to use them to aid our communication, we should understand that we are making our own job harder, not easier. If people’s brains are trained to love images and videos and want to click on to more and more of them, then the last thing we should do in the middle of our sustained preaching is to turn on that desire, to remind them of what they are missing, to set alongside our verbal the stimulus of the visual. This can only make it harder for people to listen after the image, not easier.” (4)

It times past there was much more concern about visual and emotional stimuli that could interfere with gospel preaching. The next entry shows historically how a safeguard was put in place to prevent this.

One paragraph from “Why a Genevan Robe?” By Dr. C. Matthew McMahon:

“The Genevan Robe aids the congregation in being reminded as to what is taking place – it is the elevation of the Word of God. As Paul states in 1Thessalonians 2:13, “For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe.” The Genevan Robe emphasizes the importance of heeding the Word of God, instead of worrying about how the pastor looks this week. Allow this example to make the point – after a service that I attended in a church I was visiting, I overheard two women talking immediately after the service. At first, I thought that these women were going to make a comment about the sermon that had been given. Instead, they began talking about something quite different. One woman said, “Didn’t the pastor look wonderful today?” The other responded (truly) by saying, “Yes, the crease in his pants is always so perfect.” I was taken back. Instead of concentrating on the Word of God being preached, these women (and it could have just as easily been the men) commented on how good the pastor looked that day. The personality, clothing, and demeanor of the pastor should not reflect the manner in which he dressed that day in a nice suit, but rather the Word of God should be the focal point where attention should be called. The Genevan Robe aids in the congregation’s focus on the Word of God, and is a lawful distraction from the personality, demeanor and clothing of the preacher who is standing in the pulpit to deliver that Word.” (5)

Historically some of the Puritans used the Geneva Robe and a hat to mask the preacher’s apparel and appearance. All the congregants saw was the minister’s face and his mouth moving to proclaim the Word of God. All attention was to be directed to the Word of God and not the man delivering the message.

A summary of Reformed Catechisms on images of God:

Lord’s Day 35 (Heidelberg Catechism, 1563)

96. Q. What does God require in the second commandment?

A. That we in no wise make any image of God, nor worship him in any other way than he has commanded in his word.

97. Q. May we, then, not make any image at all?

A. God neither can nor may be visibly represented in any way. As for creatures, though they may be visibly represented, yet God forbids us to make or have any likeness of them in order to worship them or serve God by them.

98. Q. But may not images be tolerated in the churches as books for the laity?

A. No; for we must not be wiser than God, who will not have his people taught by dumb images, but by the living preaching of his word.

Q. 109. What sins are forbidden in the second commandment?

A. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are, all devising, counseling, commanding, using, and any wise approving, any religious worship not instituted by God himself; the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever; all worshiping of it, or God in it or by it; the making of any representation of feigned deities, and all worship of them, or service belonging to them; all superstitious devices, corrupting the worship of God, adding to it, or taking from it, whether invented and taken up of ourselves, or received by tradition from others, though under the title of antiquity, custom, devotion, good intent, or any other pretense whatsoever; simony; sacrilege; all neglect, contempt, hindering, and opposing the worship and ordinances which God hath appointed. (Westminster Larger Catechism, 1647.)

It can be concluded that:

· All images of God and Christ in any form are forbidden

· Images and statues of the saints to facilitate Worship is forbidden

· All outside visual and emotional stimuli to effect Worship is dangerous

In closing, questions for discussion:

Can a musical performance at church cause an emotional response on the part of some in the audience, rather than a conversion based on the preaching of the gospel? If so, is this a danger? Can music and images to be used to get people to come to church? If so, is this a danger? What about images and art in general? For example, would it be wrong to look at a Leonardo Da Vinci painting of Christ in a museum? Does the regulative principle of Worship extend into private life? If so, would it be wrong to listen to instrumental music in the home?

Notes:

1. Keil-Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Deuteronomy, (Grand Rapids, Michigan, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Reprinted 1985), p. 311-312.

2. James Durham, The Law Unsealed, or, A Practical Exposition of the Ten Commandments, (Glasgow. Printed by John Bryce), p. 89.

3. Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism, (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing CO. signed copy 1984), p. 284.

4. Garry Williams, The World in the Church: A Distracted World, a Distracted Church? October 2015

5. Dr. C. Matthew McMahon, Why a Genevan Robe?

6. http://www.apuritansmind.com/…/why-a-genevan-robe-by-dr-c-…/

“To God, only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.” (Romans 16:27) and “heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:28, 29)

Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of the book defending the Reformed Faith against attacks, titled: The Religion That Started in a Hat. Available at: http://www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com

Ephesians chapter 5, a devotional summary by Jack Kettler

As in previous studies, scriptures, commentary evidence, will be looked at for the purpose to glorify God in how to live.

Demonstrating Christ’s Love Ephesians 5:1, 2:

“Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children” (5:1).

“And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God” (5:2).

Flee from sexual immorality Ephesians 5:3-5:

“But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints” (5:30).

Cross References to verse Ephesians 5:3

“Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a man can commit is outside his body, but he who sins, sexually sins against his own body.” (1Corinthians 6:18)

“Put to death, therefore, the components of your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires, and greed, which is idolatry.” (Colossians 3:5)

From Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible on Ephesians 5:3:

“But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness … The apostle proceeds to dehort from several vices, which are unbecoming the dear children and followers of God; and which the love of Christ should constrain them to avoid: the first of these, which is simple “fornication”, is the sin which is committed between single or unmarried persons; and is contrary to the law of God, is a work of the flesh, and is against a man’s own body; it renders persons unfit for church communion, brings many temporal calamities upon them, and exposes them to divine wrath, and excludes from the kingdom of heaven, without repentance; and the reason why it is so often taken notice of is, because it was very frequent among the Gentiles, and not thought criminal: “all uncleanness” takes in adultery, incest, sodomy, and every unnatural lust; and “covetousness” seems not so much to design that sin which is commonly so called, namely, an immoderate desire after worldly things, as a greedy and insatiable appetite after the above lusts:

let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; that is, neither one or other of them; the sense is, that they should not be committed; so that there might be no occasion to speak of them, even though with abhorrence, as if there were no such vices in being; and much less should they be named with pleasure, and pleaded for: for thus it becomes such who are set apart by God the Father, whose sins are expiated by the blood of Christ, and whose hearts are sanctified by the Spirit of God; who profess the Gospel of Christ, and have a place and a name in God’s house, better than that of sons and daughters.” (1)

“Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving” (5:4).

“For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God” (5:5).

Living in Christ’s Grace Ephesians 5:6-14:

“Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience” (5:6).

“Therefore do not become partners with them” (5:7);

“for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light” (5:8)

“(for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true),” (5:9)

“and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord” (5:10).

“Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (5:11).

“For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret” (5:12).

“But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible” (5:13),

“for anything that becomes visible is light. Therefore it says, Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you” (5:14).

Living with Christ’s wisdom Ephesians 5:15-17:

“Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise” (5:15),

“making the best use of the time, because the days are evil” (5:16).

5:17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.

Warning against drunkenness and exhortation to praise God Ephesians 5:18-21:

“And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit” (5:18),

Cross References to Ephesian 5:18

“Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by them is not wise.” (Proverbs 20:1)

“Those who linger over wine, those who go to taste mixed drinks.” (Proverbs 23:30)

“Do not gaze at wine while it is red, when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly.” (Proverbs 23:31)

From Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers on Ephesians 5:18:

“(18) Be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess. —From the general idea of reckless levity, St. Paul passes on to the special sin of drunkenness, as not (like gluttony) primarily a gratification of the appetite, but as a reckless pursuit of excitement at all costs—glorified as an excitement of emotion, and even of wit and intellect, in such contemporary writers as Horace, and actually confused, as in the Dionysiac or Bacchanalian frenzy, with a divine inspiration. How necessary the admonition was we see by the directions as to the choice of clergy in the Pastoral Epistles (1Tim. 3:28; Titus 1:7; Titus 2:3); the more necessary, because (as 1Timothy 5:23 shows) the right use of wine was recognised. Hence St. Paul emphatically brands drunkenness as “excess,” a word properly signifying “recklessness”—“incapable of saving,” or denying itself anything, and naturally passing through this want of self-restraint into profligacy—rightly translated “riot” in Titus 1:6, 1Peter 4:4, as the corresponding adverb is rendered “riotous living” in Luke 15:13. For drunkenness is at once the effect and cause of utter recklessness. It is the effect of a self-abandonment, by which the sensual or passionate elements of the nature are stimulated to frenzy, while the self-controlling judgment is drugged to sleep. It is the cause of yet greater recklessness: for as these passions and appetites become jaded, they need stronger and stronger stimulants, till the whole nature, bodily and mental, is lost in delirium or stupor.

But be filled with the Spirit.—The antithesis is startling, but profoundly instructive. To the artificial and degrading excitement of drunkenness St. Paul boldly opposes the divine enthusiasm of the Spirit, one form of which was scoffingly compared to it on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:13). He is not content with warning us of its ruinous excess, or urging the strictness of stern self-restraint. Drunkenness comes from an unnatural craving for excitement, stimulated by unwholesome conditions of life, physical and mental. He would satisfy the craving, so far as it is natural, by a divine enthusiasm, brighter and stronger than even duty to God and man, breaking out in thanksgiving, adoration, and love.” (2)

“addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart” (5:19),

“giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” (5:20),

“submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ” (5:21).

Exhortations to Wives and Husbands Ephesians 5:22-33:

“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord” (5:22).

Cross References to Ephesians 5:22

“Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” (Colossians 3:18)

“Wives, in the same way, submit yourselves to your husbands, so that even if they refuse to believe the word, they will be won over without words by the behavior of their wives.” (1Peter 3:1)

From Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary on Ephesians 5:22:

“22. (Eph. 6:9.) The Church’s relation to Christ in His everlasting purpose, is the foundation and archetype of the three greatest of earthly relations, that of husband and wife (Eph. 5:22-33), parent and child (Eph. 6:1-4), master and servant (Eph. 6:4-9). The oldest manuscripts omit “submit yourselves”; supplying it from Eph. 5:21, “Ye wives (submitting yourselves) unto your own husbands.” “Your own” is an argument for submissiveness on the part of the wives; it is not a stranger, but your own husbands whom you are called on to submit unto (compare Ge 3:16; 1Co 7:2; 14:34; Col 3:18; Tit 2:5; 1Pe 3:1-7). Those subjects ought to submit themselves, of whatever kind their superiors are. “Submit” is the term used of wives: “obey,” of children (Eph. 6:1), as there is a greater equality between wives and husbands, than between children and parents.

as unto the Lord—Submissiveness is rendered by the wife to the husband under the eye of Christ, and so is rendered to Christ Himself. The husband stands to the wife in the relation that the Lord does to the Church, and this is to be the ground of her submission: though that submission is inferior in kind and degree to that which she owes Christ (Eph. 5:24).”(3)

“For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior” (5:23).

“Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands” (5:24).

“Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (5:25),

Cross References to Ephesians 5:25

“Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.” (Colossians 3:19)

“Husbands, in the same way, treat your wives with consideration as a delicate vessel and with honor as fellow heirs of the gracious gift of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.” (1Peter 3:7)

From Matthew Poole’s Commentary on Ephesians 5:25:

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, viz. with a sincere, pure, ardent, and constant affection. As they resemble Christ in the honour they have of being the heads of their wives, so they must likewise in performing the duty of loving them, under which all matrimonial duties are comprehended.

And gave himself for it; whereby he testified the greatness of his love.” (4)

“that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word” (5:26),

“so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish” (5:27).

“In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself” (5:28).

“For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church” (5:29),

“because we are members of his body” (5:30).

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (5:31).

“This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church” (5:32).

“However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband” (5:33).

All Scriptures from the English Standard Version (ESV)

Notes:

1. John Gill, Exposition of the Old and New Testaments, Ephesians, (Grace Works, Multi-Media Labs), 2011, p. 105-106.

2. Charles John Ellicott, Bible Commentary for English Readers, Ephesians, Vol. 3, (London, England, Cassell and Company), p. 50.

3. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1977) p. 1295.

4. Matthew Poole’s Commentary on the Holy Bible, Vol. 3, (Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, 1985) p. 677.

“To God, only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.” (Romans 16:27) and “heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:28, 29)
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of the book defending the Reformed Faith against attacks, titled: The Religion That Started in a Hat. Available at: http://www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com

Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of the book defending the Reformed Faith against attacks, titled: The Religion That Started in a Hat. Available at: http://www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com

Out of Facebook Jail. Will this post land me in jail again?

Proudly, I have recently been in Facebook jail for posting a meme that has a historical context, which involved a warning to concerned citizens. According to Facebook, the meme violates it’s community standards.

The meme had to do with the Nazi program of recruiting citizens to inform on their neighbors if suspected of not towing the government line. Before I could attach this quote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” by George Santayana, I was suspended without being offered an appeal. The exact community standard I violated was not provided for my benefit. In other words, the nebulous community standards were cited, with no specifics as to which exact standard and to how it was violated.

Since Facebook did not offer an appeal process, Senators, Gardner, CO, Cruz, TX, Paul, Kentucky, Blackburn, TN, Lee, UT, and Johnson, WI, regarding this matter.

I post satirical, educational memes, and news story links on a daily basis and have done so for ten years. I have many positive likes and shares every day. If someone does not like my posts, they can block me or de-friend me. It is that simple. By accepting me as a friend, this comes with the understanding that my friends will receive posts from me. Facebook’s policing tactics are unnecessary, and nothing more than attempt to play “Big Brother.”

My criteria for posts are biblical, constitutional. The constitutional criteria are based upon the FCC and the Supreme Court of the United States, which enables free expression without condoning violence, profanity, threats, and sinful pornographic sexuality. Facebook’s community standards are arbitrary, capricious, and tilted towards the left. In an additional line of questioning, when Facebook deems something is offensive, it can be asked offensive to whom?

Regarding my post that violated the ambiguous community standards, an interested individual said this:

A health care professional therapist had this to say and evaluated my meme. He said:

“I saw nothing in the meme that I’ve not read in many posts on other people’s timelines. People all along the political spectrum have made similar allusions from their own viewpoint.”

Interestingly, I have seen the same meme I attempted to post a Facebook in the past. It is well known that an individual can get in trouble with Facebook for posting something reposted from Facebook itself. How ironic.

Discrimination by Facebook is serious, and involves nameless faultfinders with no appeal process. It is especially egregious because of my advertising on Facebook.

Facebook jail and civil rights:

Section 202 of the Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1964. Even though section 201 speaks broadly about private businesses they serve the public and their proximity to interstate highways, therefore they invite interstate commerce, which is controlled by Congress. That means that Facebook cannot avoid the CRA of 1964. The FCC highway is no different. Section 202 includes your situation. Facebook’s physical location is in California. They willfully solicit and engage in business with people from a different state, from which they profit (selling ads and advertising to me). Facebook has arbitrarily sanction me based upon my “entitled to be free.” and my “religious” and “political” beliefs, is discrimination that violates the CRA of 1964.

The following are sections 202 and 203 of the CRA, Sec 202:

“All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin, if such discrimination or segregation is or purports to be required by any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of a State or any agency or political subdivision thereof.
Sec. 203. No person shall (a) withhold, deny, or attempt to withhold or deny, or deprive or attempt to deprive, any person of any right or privilege secured by section 201 or 202, or (b) intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person with the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by section 201 or 202, or (c) punish or attempt to punish any person for exercising or attempting to exercise any right or privilege secured by section 201 or 202.”

Even though Facebook has a building, they are using that building, which houses the interstate commerce and bans me from using what they offer to others based upon two actions (1) their arbitrary discrimination of me and my (1) religious and political beliefs (2) entitlement to be free. In today’s society, the restaurants mentioned in section 201 implied and if you were black and ordered a “take out” meal, but they found out that you were black and canceled the order, and then they would be in violation of the CRA. Just because being seated in a facility was the status quo in 1964, no reasonable judge would allow discrimination for take-out and bar discrimination only when seated. What I am doing is a “take out” order when I use the California facility in another state that now bans citizens “entitlement to be free” based upon a “religious” and “political” viewpoint.

Friends, help stop the censorship and “religious” and “political” discrimination. Call Senator Rand Paul Phone: 202-224-4343 and Ted Cruz 202 224-5922 today! Contact your Senator https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact

Contact your House Representative https://www.house.gov/representatives

Do not be afraid of the Facebook police; stand up for your First Amendment God-given Rights. Other social media sites respect freedom of speech much more than Facebook. I can privately provide you a list of these sites.

Truly,

Jack Kettler

CC: Senator Paul, Cruz, and Gardner

Reply’ from Gardner, Cruz, and Paul

John Bunyan B. 1628 – D. 1688

John Bunyan was an English writer and Puritan preacher best remembered as the author of the Christian allegory The Pilgrim’s Progress. In addition to The Pilgrim’s Progress, Bunyan wrote nearly sixty titles, many of them expanded sermons. Bunyan came from the village of Elstow, near Bedford. Wikipedia

John Bunyan Quotes:

“Prayer will make a man cease from sin, or sin will entice a man to cease from prayer.” – John Bunyan

“You have not lived today until you have done something for someone who can never repay you.” – John Bunyan

“I will stay in prison till the moss grows on my eye lids rather than disobey God.” – John Bunyan

“Just as Christian came up to the Cross, his burden loosed from off his shoulders, fell from off his back, and began to tumble down the hill, and so it continued to do till it came to the mouth of the sepulchre. There it fell in, and I saw it no more!” – John Bunyan

“Fear, lest, by forgetting what you are by nature, you also forget the need that you have of continual pardon, support, and supplies from the Spirit of grace, and so grow proud of your own abilities, or of what you have received from God.” – John Bunyan

“In times of affliction we commonly meet with the sweetest experiences of the love of God.” – John Bunyan

“…Great sins do draw out great grace; and where guilt is most terrible and fierce, there the mercy of God in Christ, when showed to the soul, appears most high and mighty…” – John Bunyan

“Wake up, see your own wretchedness, and fly to the Lord Jesus. He is the righteousness of God, for He Himself is God. Only by believing in His righteousness will you be delivered from condemnation.” – John Bunyan

“The glory of the next world that will never wear out, while the good things of this world will vanish.” – John Bunyan

“Pure religion and undefiled, before God and the Father, is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” – John Bunyan

“My name at the first was Graceless.” – John Bunyan

“The pilgrim’s progress: from this world to that which is to come, delivered under the similitude of a dream, wherein is discovered the manner of his setting out, his dangerous journey, and safe arrival at the desired country.” – John Bunyan

“(Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season, esteeming the reproach of the Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt. – Heb. 11:25-26)” – John Bunyan

“Christ is my righteousness. I am neither less righteous for my ill deservings nor more righteous for my good deservings, for Christ is my righteousness, and He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.” – John Bunyan

“Blessed Cross! Blessed grave! Blessed rather be The Man who there was put to shame for me.” – John Bunyan

“Even as the law uncovers sin and forbids it, it does not provide the power to subdue it.” – John Bunyan

“Our sins, when laid upon Christ, were yet personally ours, not his; so his righteousness, when put upon us, is yet personally his, not ours.” – John Bunyan

“that we fulfilled the law by Him, died by Him, rose from the dead by Him, got the victory over sin, death, the devil, and hell, by Him; when He died, we died, and so of His resurrection. Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise, saith He. Isa. xxvi.” – John Bunyan

The International John Bunyan Society

What Happens To Those Who Never Hear The Gospel? By Jack Kettler

As in previous studies, definitions will be looked at along with scriptures, commentary evidence, and confessional support for the purpose to glorify God in how we live.

In this study, the answer will be stated at the beginning, and then Scriptural proof will be marshaled in support of the answer. There are those who struggle with answering this question. If a person were lost who has not heard the gospel, some would say this is not fair.

First off, there are many today and in times past who have not heard the gospel. What happens to them? Are they sinners or not? What about those who perished in the flood? Were they sinners or not? Did the pre-flood sinners hear the gospel or not?

What is natural revelation? Natural or general revelation is God speaking and making Himself known in His creation.

God has spoken to all of humanity through natural revelation:

The answer to this question is simple. Since all are sinners, they are lost whether they have heard the gospel or not. Those who have not heard the gospel will not be punished for not hearing the gospel, but for not responding to God’s testimony in nature. God has spoken clearly to all of humankind through natural revelation.

All have heard God’s voice and suppressed it:

“His handywork is seen in creation.” Moreover, “there is no pace in heaven or earth where His voice is not heard.” In the New Testament book of Romans, the apostle Paul refers to Psalm 19 and in particular 19:4. “But I say have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world” (Romans 10:18). A fallen man may try to evade this testimony, yet he cannot escape it. All humankind is guilty.

God’s natural revelation is so clear, that is why according to Romans 1:18 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.”

It can be concluded that all whether hearing the gospel or not are justly under God’s condemnation.

Is it fair?

The problem in answering the starting question is that emotions and feelings govern or interfere with interpreting the Bible to find the answer.

To answer the question one must not let experience, feelings or emotions influence the interpretation of God’s Word. God is holy and righteous and whatever He does is right simply because He does it. There is no standard higher than God is. Are you O man, going to hold God to your standard?

Think about it, holding God to your standard. That would mean your standard is higher than God is. Consider O man who would dare to be God’s counseller:

“Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counseller hath taught him?” (Isaiah 40:13)

“For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his counseller?” (Romans 11:34)

“Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, what makest thou? Or thy work, He hath no hands?” (Isaiah 45:9)

“Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus?” (Romans 9:20)

In contrast with natural revelation. Special Revelation from Article 2 of the Belgic Confession:

“Secondly, he makes himself more clearly and fully known to us by his holy and divine Word, that is to say, as far as is necessary for us to know in this life, to his glory and our salvation.”

Scriptures and commentary on the universal sinfulness of all humanity:

“And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Genesis 6:5)

From the Pulpit Commentary on Genesis 6:5:

“Verse 5. – And God (Jehovah, which should have been rendered ‘the Lord’) saw – indicative of the long-continued patience (Calvin) of the Deity, under whose immediate cognizance the great experiment of the primeval age of the world was wrought out – that the wickedness (ra’ath; from the root raa, to make a loud noise, to rage, hence to be wicked) of man (literally, of the Adam: this was the first aggravation of the wickedness which God beheld; it was the tumultuous rebellion of the being whom he had created in his own image) was great (it was no slight iniquity, but a wide-spread, firmly-rooted, and deeply-staining corruption, the second aggravation) in the earth. This was the third aggravation; it was in the world which he had made, and not only in it, but pervading it so “that integrity possessed no longer a single corner” (Calvin). And that every imagination – yetzer, a device, like pottery ware, from yatza, to fashion as a potter (Genesis 2:7; Genesis 8:19). Cf. yotzer, a potter, used of God (Psalm 94:9, 20). Hence the fashioned purpose (ἐνθύμησις) as distinguished from the thought out of which it springs – “a distinction not generally or constantly recognized by the mental philosopher, though of essential importance in the theory of the mind” (Murphy) – of the thoughts – mahshevoth; from hashal, to think, to meditate = ἔννοια; cf. Hebrews 9:12 (T. Lewis) – of his heart – or, the heart, the seat of the affections and emotions of the mind. Cf. Judges 16:15 (love); Proverbs 31:11 (confidence); Proverbs 5:12 (contempt); Psalm 104:15 (joy). Here “the feeling, or deep mother heart, the state of soul, lying below all, and giving moral character to all” (Lewis). Cf. the psychological division of Hebrews 4:12 was only evil continually. Literally, every day. “If this is not total depravity, how can language express it?” Though the phrase does not mean “from infancy,” yet “the general doctrine” (of man’s total and universal depravity) “is properly and consistently elicited hence” (Calvin).” (1)

“The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.” (Psalms 14:2, 3)

The Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary captures the Psalmist’s thought on verse 3 from Psalm 14 perfectly:

“3. Filthy—literally, “spoiled,” or, “soured,” “corrupted” (Job 15:16; Ro 3:12).” (2)

“But we are as an unclean thing, and all our righteousness are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.” (Isaiah 64:6)

From Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers on Isaiah 64:6:

“(6) We are all as an unclean thing . . .—Better, as he who is unclean, scil,* like the leper of Leviticus 13:45.

Filthy rags point to that which to the Israelite was the other extremest form of ceremonial uncleanness, as in Ezekiel 36:17.

Have taken us away – scil, afar off from the light and favour of Jehovah.” (3)

* Scil is equivalent “to wit”

“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9

Again from Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers on Jeremiah 17:9:

“(9) The heart is deceitful . . .—The sequence of ideas seems as follows: If the blessing and the curse are thus so plainly marked, how is it that man chooses the curse and not the blessing, the portion of the “heath in the desert” rather than that of the “tree planted by the waters”? And the answer is found in the inscrutable self-deceit of his nature blinding his perceptions of good and evil.

Desperately wicked.—Rather, incurably diseased, as in Jeremiah 15:18; Jeremiah 30:12; Jeremiah 30:15; Isaiah 17:11, and elsewhere. Wickedness is, of course, implied, but it is regarded rather as a moral taint following on the deliberate choice, than as the choice itself.” (4)

“There is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.” (Romans 3:11-12)

From Matthew Poole’s Commentary on Romans 3:11:

“There is none that understandeth; a more particular proof of the corruption of the soul, and the faculties thereof; and first of the mind, taken out of the forecited Psalms, which may be compared with the scriptures which speak of the ignorance and blindness of the mind, Deuteronomy 32:29 Job 32:9 Isaiah 1:3 Jeremiah 4:22 10:14.

There is none that seeketh after God, a proof of the corruption of the will, which follows also in the forecited Psalms.” (5)

From the Westminster Catechism question 60, which answers the starting question:

Q. 60. Can they who have never heard the gospel, and so know not Jesus Christ, nor believe in him, be saved by their living according to the light of nature?

A. They who, having never heard the gospel,[253] know not Jesus Christ,[254] and believe not in him, cannot be saved,[255] be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature,[256] or the laws of that religion which they profess;[257] neither is there salvation in any other, but in Christ alone,[258] who is the Savior only of his body the church.[259]

Scriptural proofs:

[253] Romans 10:14. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?

[254] 2Thessalonians 1:8-9. In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power. Ephesians 2:12. That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. John 1:10-12. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

[255] John 8:24. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Mark 16:16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

[256] 1Corinthians 1:20-24. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them, which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

[257] John 4:22. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. Romans 9:31-32. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone. Philippians 3:4-9. Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.

[258] Acts 4:12. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

[259] Ephesians 5:23. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

In closing:

A fallen man can lay no claim on God’s favor. Because of man’s entirely corrupt nature, resulting from the fall, God is under no obligation to save anyone. Once more, what about those who have not heard the gospel? They have heard God’s testimony in nature, Psalm 19:4 and suppressed it and are awaiting God’s wrath Romans 1:18.

Historically, the people and nations who have not heard the gospel are “heathen.” The fact of those in spiritual darkness without the gospel has always been the prime motivator for missions to the heathen nations. Pray that God will give increase to the missionary zeal of the Church.

Notes:

1. H. D. M. Spence and Joseph S. Exell, The Pulpit Commentary, Genesis, Vol.1., (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Eerdmans Publishing Company reprint 1978), p. 103.

2. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan, 1977) p. 411.

3. Charles John Ellicott, Bible Commentary for English Readers, Isaiah, Vol.4, (London, England, Cassell and Company), p. 570.

4. Charles John Ellicott, Bible Commentary for English Readers, Jeremiah, Vol.5, (London, England, Cassell and Company), p. 63.

5. Matthew Poole’s Commentary on the Holy Bible, Vol. 3, (Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, 1985) p. 487.

“To God, only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.” (Romans 16:27) and “heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:28, 29)

Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of the book defending the Reformed Faith against attacks, titled: The Religion That Started in a Hat. Available at: http://www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com

For more Study:

General revelation: the universal disclosure of God in nature, in providential history and in moral law within the heart (conscience), whereby all persons at all times and places gain a rudimentary understanding of the Creator and his moral demands. (Romans 1:18-20).

Special revelation: God’s self-disclosure in redemptive history and in the interpretive word of Scripture whereby He makes Himself and His truth known at specific times and to specific people. God cannot be known redemptively except as He reveals Himself to us. Jesus is the culmination of God’s self-disclosure to man and since Jesus cannot be separated from His word; the Scriptures are the ultimate form of divine revelation from God to us, for without them, we would know nothing certain about Jesus or any of the Divine Persons of the Holy Trinity.

The Biblical laws for Quarantine and Sanitation By Jack Kettler

What do the Scriptures say about quarantines? When you have a plague or an infectious disease in the land, which biblically is required to be quarantined? What about the contemporary phrase “social distancing.” Is this approach biblical? In this study, biblical quarantine and sanitary laws will be surveyed. Surprisingly, if followed, out of control, problematic health issues can be solved without infringing upon civil liberties or destroying businesses.

A study like this is relevant considering the panic of government officials over the latest of the yearly flu virus, the so-called Wuhan China flu. The panic is at least partially due to the question of the Wuhan virus, possibly being a human-engineered weaponized virus. To put things in perspective, 10 to 60 thousand people die from the flu each year in the U.S.

Most of the time, politicians from large decaying cities in America are not in the least concerned about public health issues accept for political purposes. For example, the West coast large city mayors and governors are not concerned with giant rat-infested homeless camps and humans defecating on the streets, real breeding grounds for infectious diseases.

With that said, a biblical study on how to handle a virus or plaque seems prudent. In general, compared to biblical law, political operatives have things ass-backward. God has provided biblical principles, if followed, to solve many public health emergencies.

A number of passages will be surveyed. A complete listing in this study of passages is not necessary to avoid redundancy. The majority of the passages will be from the Old Testament. How can passages from the Old Testament, which were for Israel, have anything to say today? Let us see.

The Scriptures on quarantine laws:

“But if the spot is white in the skin of his body and appears no deeper than the skin, and the hair in it has not turned white, the priest shall shut up the diseased person for seven days.” (Leviticus 13:4 ESV) (All passages will be in the English Standard Version unless otherwise noted).

“He shall remain unclean as long as he has the disease. He is unclean. He shall live alone. His dwelling shall be outside the camp.” (Leviticus 13:46)

“And if the priest examines the itching disease and it appears no deeper than the skin and there is no black hair in it, then the priest shall shut up the person with the itching disease for seven days, and on the seventh day the priest shall examine the disease. If the itch has not spread, and there is in it no yellow hair, and the itch appears to be no deeper than the skin, then he shall shave himself, but the itch he shall not shave; and the priest shall shut up the person with the itching disease for another seven days.” (Leviticus 13:31-33)

“The leprous person who has the disease shall wear torn clothes and let the hair of his head hang loose, and he shall cover his upper lip and cry out, ‘Unclean, unclean.’ He shall remain unclean as long as he has the disease. He is unclean. He shall live alone. His dwelling shall be outside the camp.” (Leviticus 13:45-46)

“Command the people of Israel that they put out of the camp everyone who is leprous or has a discharge and everyone who is unclean through contact with the dead. You shall put out both male and female, putting them outside the camp, that they may not defile their camp, in the midst of which I dwell.” (Numbers 5:2-3)

“And as he entered a village, he was met by ten lepers, who stood at a distance.” (Luke 17:12)

Quarantines Today by Gary North, author of more than fifty books:

“The question then arises: Is priestly quarantining biblically legitimate today? There is no indication that any of these named diseases survived the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. There is also no indication that the laws of quarantine by a priest continue into the New Covenant. On the contrary, they could not have survived the demise of the priesthood. The quarantine laws were part of the Levitical laws of the Mosaic Covenant, and, I think, to some degree were connected to jubilee land laws of Leviticus 25. These laws all perished with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. With the collapse of the judicial boundaries of the nation of Israel, there was a collapse of those ritual boundary laws that had governed the people of Israel even before they entered into the land of Canaan. There was no longer any tabernacle to be excluded from, and there was no unclean place outside either the camp or the city to which anyone could be banished. In other words, these laws related to plague, and plague in Mosaic Israel was judicial rather than biological.

In New Testament times, we can study biological afflictions as a separate class of phenomena, and we can also see them as the judgments of God. We do not have the ability to identify the specific sin, either corporate or personal, that leads to most sicknesses, with the exception of venereal diseases. Neither did the priest of the Mosaic Covenant in most cases. The priest was not asked to identify the sin that had led to the individual’s affliction. The priest was required only to identify the affliction and deal with it judicially. We can therefore say that in New Testament times, afflictions of a biological nature can be dealt with either through medical techniques or by public health techniques. Contagious people can either be cured or they can be quarantined. The quarantining process, however, is based on considerations of the contagious nature of the disease, not the judicial status of the individual. Public health laws in the modern world are to be governed by statutes, and statutes must be predictable. Individuals must know in advance the penalties or sanctions that will be imposed for specific kinds of behavior. Thus, an individual who comes down with a disease cannot be said to be a threat to the community merely because he has come down with a disease. The judicial diseases of the Mosaic Covenant are no longer with us. Therefore, the diseases that afflict us today are like the common diseases that afflicted people inside and outside of Mosaic Israel. They are to be dealt with in similar ways: by medical care, by quarantine, by prayer, or by anointing by the elders (James 5:14).

To Protect the Public

The idea of quarantine in the 13th chapter of Leviticus is based on the need to protect the public. The spread of the disease, or other forms of God’s judgment, was to be halted by removing the afflicted individual from within the city. The concern was public health, but it was not a concern about biological contagion. It was concern about the willingness of God to afflict other individuals with the disease or other afflictions because of their unwillingness to enforce His law. Thus, the quarantining process of Leviticus 13 was primarily judicial. In fact, it would probably be safe to say that it was entirely judicial. Only by the extension of the principle of the protection of others within the city is it legitimate to classify today’s diseases as being subject legally to the Bible’s quarantining process.

Does this qualification alter the legal status of the civil government? For example, does this mean that in modern times the civil government is required to finance an individual who has been quarantined? The State has brought sanctions against him in the name of the health of the community. This was also the case in Mosaic Israel. The State has put him under quarantine because he is biologically contagious. This was not the case in the Mosaic Israel. Does the shift from judicial affliction to biological affliction change the legal requirements of the civil government? Does the change from the contagious legal status of the individual to his contagious biological status change the requirements of the civil government? In other words, do the quarantine laws of the civil government go through a fundamental transformation between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant?

It is part of English common law that when a city is on fire, the authorities have the right to knock down an individual’s house in order to stop the spread of that fire. It is also part of common law that the city and the community do not owe anything to the individual who has had his house knocked down in this way. It is presumed that the fire would have destroyed the house anyway. It is also assumed that by destroying the individual’s house, other houses within the community will be protected. This law was for generations basic to the protection of cities. If the fire-fighters had to worry about the cost of repayment each time they knocked down a house, it is unlikely that they would have had the same kind of incentive to knock down the houses. Obviously, if the price of an action goes up, less of it will be demanded. In this case, it means that the city would have been less likely to be protected from the “plague” of fire because of legal obligations to repay those people who were unfortunate enough to be caught in the line of fire, and whose houses, if knocked down, would have allowed the creation of a fire break. It was assumed that the safety of the city was of greater importance than the loss to the individual. Because the house probably would have burned down anyway, it really was not a net loss to the owner.

Consider a contemporary individual who has contracted a contagious disease. He has become a threat to the community. If the community is required by law to finance this individual until such time as he recovers biologically from the disease, it is less likely that the community will take the necessary steps to isolate him. Common law therefore does not require the civil government to compensate the quarantined individual. Neither does biblical law. This is why quarantine is a devastating event in the life of the individual. Historically, quarantined people have not been permitted to leave their homes. Others have not been able to come into those homes without falling under the ban. While it is assumed that charity will be forthcoming to help the quarantined individual in his time of need, it has been assumed until very recently that the State has no legal obligation to support that person during the period of his confinement. To do so would raise the cost of confining individuals, and it would therefore lead to an unwillingness on the part of public health officials to confine them. This would increase the risk of contagion and disease in the community.

The contagious nature of the disease, in effect, is a form of violence. It is violence conducted by a third party, namely, the biological organisms that transmit the disease, but it is still a form of violence. The carrier places other people at risk. Thus, common law determined that an individual who becomes a threat to the community must be removed from the community so as to reduce the likelihood of this indirect form of violence. Public health measures are directed against the disease primarily and against its carriers secondarily.” (1)

As can be seen from North’s commentary, quarantine laws applied to those with infectious diseases, not healthy people. Moreover, as in the case of a house on fire, the police and larger society is not to bear the cost of the quarantine.

Gary North is an American paleolibertarian writer, Austrian School economic historian, and leading figure in the Christian Reconstructionist movement. … He is known for his advocacy of biblical and libertarian economics and as a theorist of dominionism and theonomy. Wikipedia

R. J. Rushdoony on Biblical Quarantine Laws

“The commandment, “Thou shalt not kill,” has, as its positive requirement, the mandate to preserve and further life within the framework of God’s law. Basic to this framework of preservation are the laws of quarantine…To return to the quarantine laws with respect to diseases, those cited in Leviticus 13 and 14 are generally described as leprosy and plague. The term leprosy has changed its meaning extensively from its biblical and “medieval” meaning. The meaning then covered a variety of infectious diseases. In terms of this, the meaning of this legislation is that contagious diseases must be treated with all necessary precautions to prevent contagion. Legislation is thus necessary wherever society requires protection from serious and contagious diseases. The state has therefore a legislative power in dealing with plagues, epidemics, venereal diseases, and other contagious and dangerous diseases. Such legislation is plainly required in the Mosaic Law (Num. 5:1-4). Not only is it declared to be a matter of civil legislation, but also an essential aspect of religious education (Deut. 24:8).

It is clear, however, that this legislation, requiring some kind of quarantine or separation for those who are diseased, or who handle the dead (Num. 5:2), has implications beyond the realm of physical diseases.” (2)

R. J. Rushdoony and quarantine laws through history:

“It is also important to note that the observance of these laws helped eliminate Hansen’s disease, or true leprosy, faster in Europe than in other continents. In Europe, there were at least 9,000 hospitals for leprosy alone, maintained by Christian charity. Louis VII of France left legacies to more than 2,000 hospitals for lepers in his country; no ruler of our times has manifested any comparable charity. The Normans in France applied quarantine strictly, both in Normandy and in England. Thus, the very wealthy and influential Knight, Amiloun, was expelled from his castle to become a beggar when he contracted leprosy. The Lateran Council of 1172 required that special churches be built for lepers, and, in time, both hospitals and churches were available for lepers.” (3)

R. J. Rushdoony bio: a Calvinist philosopher, historian, and theologian and is widely credited as being the father of Christian Reconstructionism and an inspiration for the modern Christian homeschool movement. His followers and critics have argued that his thought exerts considerable influence on the evangelical Christian right. From Wikipedia

The Scriptures on Sanitary Laws:

“And an earthenware vessel that the one with the discharge touches shall be broken, and every vessel of wood shall be rinsed in water.” (Leviticus 15:12)_

“Encamp outside the for camp seven days. Whoever of you has killed any person and whoever has touched any slain purify yourselves and your captives on the third day and on the seventh day. You shall purify every garment, every article of skin, all work of goats’ hair, and every article of wood.” (Numbers 31:19-20)

“If any man among you becomes unclean because of a nocturnal emission, then he shall go outside the camp. He shall not come inside the camp, but when evening comes, he shall bathe himself in water, and as the sun sets, he may come inside the camp.” (Deuteronomy 23:10-11) Burying human waste

“Designate a place outside the camp where you can go to relieve yourself. As part of your equipment, have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement.” (Deuteronomy 23:12-13 NIV)

An excerpt from The First Book of Public Hygiene:

“On the positive side, the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch, provide tremendous insight and relief concerning disease prevention. Remarkably, the Pentateuch is regarded as the earliest evidence we have of sound public health and sanitary practices. These ancient writings, when used in conjunction with modern medicine, can break the mode of transmission of virtually every scourge known to humanity.

What follows is a brief summary of the biblical instructions pertaining to public health and sanitation. Bear in mind that these regulations were practiced some 3,500 years before the germ concept of disease was discovered (mainly by the creationist Louis Pasteur)!” (4)

The full article is a goldmine of wisdom. As an aside, when God gave the Pentateuch and all of the wisdom included therein to the people of Israel, the continent of Europe was not much more than bands of savages.

Concluding thoughts:

Regarding the continuing validity of Old Testament principles:

“To them also, as a body politic, he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the state of that people, not obliging any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require.” (Westminster Confession of Faith, 19.4)

The “general equity” refers not to the specific law, but an abiding principle in the law.

For example:

“When you build a new house, you shall make a parapet [railing] for your roof, that you may not bring the guilt of blood upon your house, if anyone should fall from it.” (Deuteronomy 22:8)

Examples of the enduring continuity would be:

1. Having a fence around your swimming pool.

2. Having your yard fenced in if, you have a potentially vicious dog.

Some buildings and apartments have rooftop recreational areas. Of course, you would want some type of barrier or railing for protection. In modern jurisprudence, there is a whole body of liability laws that deal with things like this. The bottom line, it is about protecting your neighbor and limiting your liability.

Many of the case laws are more difficult to find principals that have modern applications. A passage from Mark 12:31 is the key to finding continuing principles of applications.

“The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:31)

Instead of locking down entire states, closing down businesses, and placing people essentially under house arrest, the biblical solution is only the person with infectious disease is quarantined, not the public at large. People are free to visit and care for the infected at their own risk. Many Christian charities do precisely this.

The contemporary phrase “social distancing” can be good advice from health and state officials. Likewise, reminding people of personal hygiene such as washing hands.

On closing churches, this should be the call of the elders of the Church in consultation with health officials. Any responsible official would seek the advice of the local clergy before issuing an edict, forcing churches to cease normal functions.

Defining churches as non-essential is an egregious overreach on the part of the state. The Church, at the very least, should protest being labeled as non-essential vigorously.

We can pray that this present crisis does not turn into a yearly-politicized flu emergency.

Here is a quote from Martin Luther when he faced the Black Death Plague:

“I shall ask God mercifully to protect us. Then I shall fumigate, help purify the air, administer medicine and take it. I shall avoid places and persons where my presence is not needed in order not to become contaminated and thus perchance inflict and pollute others and so cause their death as a result of my negligence. If God should wish to take me, he will surely find me, and I have done what he has expected of me so I am not responsible for either my own death or the death of others. If my neighbor needs me however, I shall not avoid place or person but will go freely as stated above. See this is such a God-fearing faith because it is neither brash nor foolhardy and does not tempt God.”

Historically, Christians have never run away from plagues. “God has not given us the spirit of fear.” (2Timothy 1:7)

“To God, only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.” (Romans 16:27) and “heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:28-29)

Notes:

1. Gary North, BOUNDARIESAND DOMINIONAN ECONOMIC COMMENTARYON LEVITICUS VOLUME 1, (Dallas GA, Point Five Press), p. 292-293.

2. Rousas John Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law, Vol. 1, (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Craig Press), p. 293.

3. Rousas John Rushdoony, Commentaries on the Pentateuch: Leviticus, (Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 2005), p. 144-145.

4. David Wise, The First Book of Public Hygiene, (Originally published in Creation 26, no 1 (December 2003): 52-55. https: //answersingenesis.org/biology/disease/the-first-book-of-public-hygiene/

Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of the book defending the Reformed Faith against attacks, titled: The Religion That Started in a Hat. Available at: www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com

For more study:

None of These Diseases by S. I. McMillen