第六章 袭击最后一代

现在，当撒但应用其罪饵引诱世界上最后一代基督复临安息日会信徒时，我们要作好准备探究其经典策略。在注视他为末后的日子精心制作的诱人伪装之时，我们不可忘记他也会用其他的武器来削弱余民教会。事实上，他通过发起内部对三天使信息的巧言异议与批评，已经动摇了千万人的信心。借着排斥成圣，因信称义的真实教义被冲淡了；预言之灵已受到攻击；律法已被人轻视；审判的信息已被削弱——事实上，这些对信仰之基础柱石尖刻的正面攻击，已经结出了意想不到的叛道之果。

“异端的恶魔已规划了整个世界的版图，并决意占领之作为他的国度。他有庞大的军队，他们都是伪装、阴险、而坚忍的。他们抵挡一切神圣的感化力，利用各样的媒介要造成每一个生灵的毁灭。他们具有热忱、机敏，与不可思议的才干，并在每一个新开的门路高举真理标识的地方乘隙进侵。”——《举目向上看》，P275

“许多人要站在我们的讲台上，手里拿着假预言的火把，是从撒但地狱般的火把点燃的。”——《给传道人的证言》，P409，410

尽管如此，绝大部分人还没有因为受异端教导的影响而放弃信仰。看起来他们很可能决不会由于反对基础教义的神学辩论而偏离真理，至少在目前的心态是不会。对于这些复临信徒，撒旦看出要解除他们的信仰需要另谋途径。如果他无法通过理性吸引影响他们放弃安息日，他就要用感性上的吸引了——这同一套诡计用在夏娃与以色列人身上都相当奏效。如果他能够制造一种气氛，使属灵的心意松懈下来，允许他开始侵入五种感观通道的其中之一，他便有机会控制决定与意志的主要终端——大脑了。

现今你环顾四周就会目睹在这个星球上曾经装配好的恶魔器械与装置之最精湛的部署。每一项都被设计来要在人的心思里取得一处小小的立足之地。它们都仿效着伊甸园的模式，只是更加形式多样并且微妙动人了；这些全都为致力于要拆毁基督徒与世俗之间的敌对。

下述内容的目的可以说是为了对于世界所发生的问题作少许特别的观察。想一想这些深广的、基本的因素，它们把世界摆在了与圣经原则截然相反的立场上：

其语言。面对语言这种媒介的急剧腐坏堕落，无人不感到震惊。我们不仅在所有人都要不时进出的市场上听到越来越多亵渎与粗俗的语言，而且在收音机、电视以及报纸等正规渠道上也充斥着刺激属灵知觉的咒言赘语。媒体运用庸俗下流的俚语脏话发表评论进行人身攻击也变得流行起来，而且相当为人所接受。

一篇名为“女性坏话规程”的文章出现在1987年7月8日“华盛顿邮报”上。该文章令人震惊的核心要旨是为女性越来越多地使用亵渎语辩护。专栏女作家写道:

“只要女性遵守某些惯例——可以可称之为‘商业赌咒礼节’——她们就可以不必追究其过失，甚至是获益于明智使用亵渎的语言了。”

“据报道，由于两性在工作场合赌咒的情形都正在高涨，于是这项女性语言的特许就新出炉了。这样的增长归因于各种不同的原因，如非正式化的倾向、宗教信仰的衰退，工作场所压力的高涨，还有60年代的变革——这在特定年龄段的人可能还记得。无论原因是什么，女性们都只是在向男性们学习游戏规则的过程中把更衣室的语言拣起来了。并且正如许多人所发现的那样，丰富多彩的语言通常是派得上用场的。”

接着就列出了女性恰如其分地掌握赌咒与漫骂的粗俗技巧所带来的系列好处。作者说，“虽然像船员那样咒骂肯定是会毁掉女性的温柔气质的，但对某些女性而言也不失为一项有效的战略。”

毫无疑问，我们越与世界交往，谈话就越会受粗话表达的影响；那些表达正潜移默化地导使人更严重地违反上帝“是就说是，不是就说不是”的说话原则。

许多基督复临安息日会的教友已经把流行“俚语”混用于礼貌的誓词中，却没有意识到那实在是妄称了上帝的圣名。依照字典，像“唧（gee：用作一委婉的咒骂语或喊叫，表示惊奇、热情或同情，源自Jesus即耶稣一词的变化。）”

“啊，天哪（golly：用来表达轻微的惊讶或惊奇，源自God即上帝一词的变化。）” 还有“唉!, 必定!, 糟了!

天啊（gosh：用来表达轻微的惊奇或高兴，源自God即上帝一词的变化。）”等词语实际上都是由神的名字派生出来的。在许多实例中，替换词被用来取代了描述上帝品性的上帝的圣名，并且那些替代词被漫不经心地用在肤浅随意的谈话中。甚至从讲台上也常常听到这样的话。“看在老天的仁慈份上（For goodness’sake）”这话只不过用上帝的一个属性来取代了“上帝”这个词。诸如“看在上天的份上(for heaven's sake)”“看在怜悯的份上(for pity sake)”等短语也是一样。如果圣洁无罪的天使每逢说出上帝之名时，尚且要遮起脸来，那么堕落的生灵将上帝的圣名与称谓置之唇边之时，该当何等愈加恭敬啊！

其物质中心主义。现代社会的每一层面都充斥着自我膨胀的贪婪精神。成功只用一个因素来衡量——就是收入。新闻广播每当报道政要或企业名人离职时，必定要提到促使他们跳槽的新的薪资水平。

注重价值、荣誉与成功总是与一种合约有关，这种合约使人得到来自聘用组织的保护。媒体内容大部分围绕着罢工、工会要求与维护合约展开。从医学博士到机组飞行员再到足球队，其主要的目标似乎都是唯利是图与唯物主义。以服务他人为更高原则的专职人员或政府公务员确实已经罕见了。

其欺骗。最近发行的“新闻周刊”杂志在其封面上特别描述了说谎。大部分内容围绕着为达目的而说谎的原则，这种原则已经普遍被人接受，是心照不宣的。绝大多数人理所当然地认为托辞与欺骗是在商业世界中的一项基础元素。广告业几乎完全是建立在误传误导的基础上。全然没有虚假内容的广告已经几乎没有了。

在反伊朗听证会期间，美国人震惊地获悉政府的许多职能也扎根于要求蓄意误传的秘密行动中。政府的方针要求政府的代表同时向公众和外国的势力说谎。许多基督徒在听着为什么会在那种强势环境下说谎的逻辑解释时，几乎被说服了，认为这毕竟还不算件糟糕透顶的事。当诺斯上校（Colonel North）描述关于其行动的真实本质需要误导每一个人的必要性时，我不得不抗拒想要同意他的试探。

大众都心甘情愿接受所有的商业与政治谎言，以及对真相的掩盖吗？事实上，这种说谎模式几乎是每个人的生活方式了。我每一次搭乘飞机，都观察到周围的人埋头在色彩缤纷的纸皮小说里。在飞行全程中，他们都活在一个谎言里。他们的感情直接被作者虚构的幻想控制着。他们的心思已被小说与电视电影之间杜撰的人物所充满，卷入了虚构的情节之中；相比之下，在现实生活中说谎几乎就变得无伤大雅，无关紧要了。

其自私。你曾注意到现今最受欢迎的理念就是要攀到最高吗？要成为最伟大，最富有，或最强盛的就要不停地竞争。当合法的手段未能抬高自我时，有些人就转为用犯罪或暴力来取得人的认可了。

所有的商业竞赛都建立在损毁别人，高抬自我的理念上，不惜任何代价。报纸上关于职业竞技各方面的报道差不多都是打架，贿赂或毒品之事。贪婪的竞赛者为伺机得到几百万美元的合约而拖延时间；为赛季榨取的酬劳越多，他们得到人们的尊敬与崇拜也就越多。

即使是华尔街最保守最受人尊敬的经纪人事务所，也被揭发同谋参与窃取美国公司几百万美元的终极阴谋。在高层人士中电视布道家污秽的犯罪丑闻被暴光，这正是自私与自负的缩影。

其骄傲。甚至一些世俗评论人士也注意到现代正式与非正式服装日趋荒唐的潮流。随着时尚风格的反复变换，基督徒们也被席卷进去，纷纷尾随当下最流行的东西。他们宁愿奋力追逐时尚——无论其是多么丢脸，却不依循端庄与良好品位的灵感原则。超短裙去而复返，极少数人——他们中许多是同性恋者——实际上决定了在未来一个季度中大多数美国人要穿什么。我们难道还不明白为什么怀姐妹要大力宣讲关于正派服装的题目吗？

其性迷恋。这或许是撒旦控制这个地球最明显的肉欲表现之一了。几年前在正派人士中连私下耳语都不提的肮脏猥亵之语，现在已经变成最受欢迎的电视讨论节目的主要话题了。这个最神圣，最私密的行为与关系已经被贬低到嘲讽喧闹的谈话秀水平了，并且全然裸露无遗。

节制生育用品在公众媒体上被广而告之，在中学论坛里被讨论，并被讲解给小学的孩子们听。

广告的每一方面无不充满着性暗示与含混暧昧的话。对基督徒来说，现在是不可能避免看到或听到从撒旦黑暗国度而来的邪恶原理的只言片语了。但是靠赖上帝的恩典与能力，那些邪恶的性反常行为能够被屏蔽，不进入圣灵执掌的心思内。然而现今看起来几乎无人要立场坚决地对抗这些各种各样明目张胆的世俗化冲击。

上帝总是要使祂的子民远离这些腐败的影响，这岂是难于理解的吗？如果我们没有特别之法自我保护的话，它们就会成为我们价值系统的一部分。如果我们与它们混杂，倾听它们的声音，却没有筑起与之分别的屏障的话，就会自动发生改变。这就是我们今日无法像几年前那样容易地分辨出教友的原因；他们穿的，吃的，谈论的都与周围耽于声色的世界非常相似。大部分的改变可以归咎于那些喂养心思的有害的感化力。

许多人没有意识到不加选择之阅读习惯的毁灭性质。心思沉浸在廉价、垃圾的主题上，就无法适应严肃的圣经学习了。我自己停止阅读那些文章是在10岁或11岁的时候读《告青年书》的结果。不需要人来向我证明那些话是真实的。我禁止不了阅读激动人心的小说，已经上瘾成癖，这已经使我在基督里找不到真正的喜乐了，我知道这些小说必须离开。下面这些话像火一样燃烧在我的良心上：

“阅读虚构小说的人，乃是放纵足以消灭灵性，掩蔽神圣篇章之优美的恶癖。这恶癖能造成不健康的兴奋，使想象趋于狂热，思想不适于有用的工作，使人弃绝祈祷，而不配从事任何属灵的活动。”——《告青年书》，P272

有一段时间，我试图要为阅读历史和宗教小说的喜好找借口，但我里面深深知道它们对我的影响。这三段证言最终使我确信我的决定断不可有丝毫妥协的余地。

“就是在某些纯粹历史性的作品中所描述的暴行、惨无人道的残酷行为、和淫荡的罪恶，也已在许多人心中如同面酵一样发挥了毒害的影响，促使他们去犯相同的罪行。”

“凡描述人类所犯鬼魔般罪恶的书籍，都是在为罪恶作宣传。这些可怕的详情细节无需重温，故此凡笃信现代真理的人，都不可在使人记念这罪恶的事上有份。”——《告青年书》，P284

“言情小说，轻浮和惊奇的故事，甚至连那一类所谓宗教小说──由作者寓以道德教训的小说、书籍，对于读者都是祸患。纵有宗教的意味交织于全部小说书中，但在大多数的情形中，只是撒但披上了天使的外袍，借此更有效地实行欺骗并诱惑罢了。”——《告青年书》，P272

“小说即使没有不纯洁的暗示，且专为教授极高尚的主义而写的，也有害处，因为它易使人养成一种匆促浮面的读书习惯，只求大概的情节，不察精细的意义。在这一方面，它就足以消灭深刻和联贯的思想力，使人对于人生的责任和前途的重大的问题，失去沉思默想的涵养…

“我们常听人说，欲使青年人不读动人视听或无价值的文字，我们就应该用比较高尚的小说来代替。这种说法，可以说是好像用啤酒苹果酒来帮助酒汉戒酒，以代替他的威士忌或白兰地。然而和缓的刺激物，只是有增无减地加重嗜好而已。戒酒的唯一方法，就是不喝酒；免除酒害的唯一保障，就是不让酒进口。爱读小说的人，也是如此。完全不看小说，才是避免小说之害的唯一完全之策。”——《给父母与教师的证言》，P383，384

这岂不是解释了为何今日如此多基督复临安息日会教友的软弱实况吗？若心思像垃圾收集中心一样堆砌着筛选进去的垃圾，那么要它思考属灵的事该是多么困难呢？上帝的圣灵不能通过一个由于如此满载污秽而已经麻木死亡了的神经渠道工作。

试着设想一下，你的头脑成为一个持久的的记忆库，你所有读过的书，它们的中心思想与原则都倾入其间。如果阅读的材料中含有不真实、不清洁、不道德的情感在里面，它们就要留下一处也许永远都不可能痊愈的心灵伤疤了。以后的年岁还会有记忆回放，产生对那些不清洁情感的新印象。甚至在我受洗之后，仍然记得与那些过去阅读过的材料重现的记忆所进行的争战。

这就清楚地说明了一项错误的阅读习惯的毁灭性影响。大脑由数十亿神经系统枢纽与记忆库组成，这样的构造方式使其几乎不可能完全抹掉对所读之物的残留印象。一旦其进入头脑的学习中心，就成了知识库几乎永久的一部分，人所有的立志行事都由此而出。

事实是当我们向非基督徒作者浓缩的思想与主张敞开自己的心思时，我们同时也同意了让他们的心理趋势变成我们自己思维模式的一部分。最后，就转化为我们所发展的品格了。我们所读的每一本书正在使我们在心思与品格上变得和作者有了一点相似，这是多么严肃的思想啊！事实上，我们正在允许别人来决定我们要成为什么样的人。

文字画面与真实的景象拥有同样的能力可以搅动想象力。这就是为什么热情的读者会被故事情节深深吸引的原因。他们的情感同样地受了影响，与电视观众一样。在意念里，他们实际上也参与了男女主人公虚构的表演情节。他们在作者所描绘的善恶情形中如同身受，于是心脏跳动加速，热泪盈眶，所有其它的生理反应也随之而来。

让心思与情感屈从于一本书中假想的人物所有表演上，难道不是一个危险的行为吗？在这样的状况下，作者就在制造并控制你的每一个思想与情绪了。藉着语言技巧，他把你推入其境，强使你感受到所饰演角色的喜悦，忧伤与罪疚感。

是不是只在意念里犯下的罪上帝也视之为我们该负责的呢？是的。祂宣称：“只是我告诉你们，凡看见妇女就动淫念的，这人心里已经与她犯奸淫了。”（太5：28）。难道我们这时还看不出撒旦是如何通过仅仅控制一个没有原则的作者的思想和语言，就能挑动千万人在意念里犯罪吗？基督徒若允许不当的阅读材料供养头脑，就很容易被改变为撒旦自己的形象，念及于此真是令人胆寒。先知写道：

“智力若受这种败坏的食粮所供养与刺激，思想就必变为污浊而淫荡的了。”——《告青年书》，P284

无论我们自己是否意识到，我们所读之物的作者正在把会带来永久后果的模型放在我们的生命里。由于吸收了怀疑论作者那种不信的思想，许多人就失丧了。其他人则可能因容许头脑中充满对于上帝和圣经错误的、自由主义的观点而失丧，这些观点是那些所谓的基督徒作者巧妙地传播的。我们当用使徒的准则仔细审查所有的阅读材料，这是极为重要的——“弟兄们，我还有未尽的话：凡是真实的、可敬的、公义的、清洁的、可爱的、有美名的，若有什么德行，若有什么称赞，这些事你们都要思念。”（腓4：8）

请用片刻时间思考一下那充满人为强烈吸引力的剧场影院。其间几乎百分之百掺假的精神食粮都是设计来磨灭宗教印记的。会有什么可能的理由使得一个基督徒要处在这样污秽的语言与歪曲的道德观念催眠般的影响下呢？什么信息正在被传达到大脑中央处理器的记忆库里呢？我们发现上帝造的脑细胞可以经由沟通纽带从五种感官带进来的任何信息被塑造。一个由基督控制并悔改的心意怎么会感到那样的场景生动有趣呢？这是不能的。基督的心意是不可能接受不清洁、不真实、不道德的事物的。惟独属肉体的心意才会对好莱坞倾倒出来的那类作品感到乐趣。

本会反对进入电影院的长期立场是不是背后有什么稳固坚实的原则呢？关于这个题目，怀姐妹强烈禁止的声明是她自己制造的呢，还是确实从主而来呢？如果电影院在100年前对基督徒而言是个危险而有问题的地方，那么今日它就变得不那么叫人反感了吗？这些都是每一位基督复临安息日会信徒需要解决的问题。

有两个非常重要的原则使得看电影不可能成为复临信徒的生活方式之一部分。上帝的真儿女怎么可能在良心上资助并维持这样一种娱乐呢？这种娱乐99%的时间都是用来摧毁我们用100%的时间所努力建造的一切的。这是没有意义的。我们怎么可以支持这种行为呢？这种行为对于我们所倡导的每件事物都是截然相反的。应该是那种极其憎恶道德的人去帮助维持这种娱乐机构，这种机构不断腐蚀并摧毁着如此多人的心智。

第二个涉及观看影视的原则就是道德上的影响问题了。当非基督徒看到基督复临安息日会信徒走进电影院时，不会认为他是去那里看“百里挑一”可以通过圣经检验的画面的；他会认为这位自称是上帝圣徒的人正同样用他所喜欢的未经挑选的普通垃圾来喂养心灵。这是多么歪曲的见证啊！给耶稣基督纯洁高尚的宗教带来多么大的嘲讽啊！

如果你愿意读一段令人惊奇的关于电视与电影之影响的话语，就请思考一下这些写于电影发明之前50年多年的灵感之言。

“我们常注意什么，就变成什么。人能因放纵不正当的思想，而使自己的心受污秽的影响，以至他原先所憎恶的罪，却变成他所爱好的事了。撒但正在用各样的方法，使罪恶和邪淫的事成为流行的习尚…许多人习于和罪恶相狎了。一般卑鄙邪恶之徒所作的坏事，常在当天的报纸和杂志中公诸大众。凡足以引起情欲的事，都在带有刺激性的小说里供人阅读。他们既听到并读到那么多卑劣可憎的事，他们那曾因这事而惊避的敏锐感觉就渐渐麻木，以致他们反以贪而无厌的兴趣来欣赏了。”——《先祖与先知》，P459

假使怀夫人亲自看了昨天晚上尼尔森收视率（Nielsen-rated）的侦探节目，也不能比这样的描述更形象完美地阐述这个问题。我们不但更熟悉罪了，而且也开始纵容罪了。有几个合理可靠的心理学推论说明了为什么人的心思会完全习惯于电视上所看到东西。电视画面故意飞快地转变，不给思想的意识层面留有时间去评价或审查到底看到的是什么。研究证明画面的急速转换实际上是避开了大脑有意识的判断，而直接进入潜意识去喂养之。我们自己还没有感觉到，心思就已经很巧妙地受了影响，对于所看到和所听到的事物变得越来越容易接受了。

我们或许为自己能够关掉不喜欢看的商业广告和电视节目而颇为自豪，但是它们的设计如此科技化，耗资数百万，就是要动摇我们的思想到底要不要看它！没有所谓无害的电视节目。潜意识的广告已经确保了每一位观众无论自己赞同与否都要受之影响。撒旦的信息正通过即使看起来最无害的广告宣传和商业行为传播着。

几天以前，我的邮箱里收到一份来自“心思交流公司”的目录。它为几百种潜意识的音像磁带做广告，吹嘘其可以百分之百有效地为几乎所有人类已知的性格弱点提供“不费力的自我改善”。

这些音像带是这样被描述的：“一系列潜意识的信息隐藏或‘伪装’在背景音乐或音波里。这些信息播放的分贝数比音乐的分贝数稍微低一些。它们会随着音乐被‘联运’到听众的大脑中，而听众却没有意识到自己已经在接受这些信息。这些信息恰好低于意识能检测出来的水平。”

对减肥与戒烟的录像带描述地如此得力，以至“面对我们的潜意识录像，人心的潜在意识几乎不可能抵抗得了其巨大的能力。这些录像如此完全地轰击并充满你的大脑细胞，以至你就变得欣欣然、能够、并且心甘情愿地去减肥或者丢弃香烟了——从今直到永远。”

这份目录到处都是红色字体的警告：“减肥录像带具有极大的力量会使那些看到或听到的人体重下降。请不要在那些不需要减肥的人面前播放。”

如果认为这么有力的广告工具并没有被贪婪的公司利用来销售他们产品，那我们就太天真了。没有人知道潜意识广告侵袭今日媒体广告业界的范围有多广。我们所确实知道的就是不能依靠大商行的道德来救我们脱离潜意识的影响；我们必须采取措施着手保护自己的心思免遭不受欢迎的入侵。

对于基督复临安息日会教友每次几小时地任由肥皂剧和连续剧污秽肮脏的空话喂养心思，我们能说些什么呢？他们没有一丁点儿的可能性能同时爱慕属灵的事物与属肉体的事物。圣经说，“人若爱世界，爱父的心就不在他里面了。”（约一2：15）“你们这些淫妇哪，岂不知与世俗为友就是与上帝为敌吗？所以凡想要与世俗为友的，就是与上帝为敌了。”（雅4:4）说那些人没有真正悔改并不过分或武断。

当撒旦看到电视机这样摧毁心思分辨洁净与不洁净的能力之时，该是何等雀跃啊。上帝的恳求被忽视：“我儿，要将你的心归我；你的眼目也要喜悦我的道路。”（箴23：26）。没有人会有可能相信电影屏幕是反映上帝的道路的。

大卫的眼目曾导致他犯下贪恋并谋杀之罪，他留下这个有力的个人见证说：“邪僻的事，我都不摆在我眼前…说谎话的，必不得立在我眼前。”（诗101：3，7）如果大卫都无法抵抗无意识地摆在他眼前的试探，那么我们能对那些通过电视故意把试探带进起居室之人说些什么呢？无疑的，在每夜的电视中比很久以前大卫在几刻钟内可以看到更多的赤裸画面，而那对心思腐化与奴役的影响正如其作用于大卫身上的一样。同样的肉体吸引，6000年来一直在刺激着堕落的本性。

大卫从他那可怕的跌倒光景中爬起来后，就下决心使他的眼睛永远不再看邪恶的事了。他作为一个合上帝心意的人，在其眼前不“摆”任何罪恶的东西。大卫当然不是在谈论“摆”不“摆”电视机，但是他定意不再追随任何给眼目带来诱惑景象的道路了。他也不允许自己让“说谎话的”“立在眼前”。如果大卫忠于那些原则，他当然决不会选择去影剧院，或在现代电视机所准备的俗餐前成为饕餮之徒。如果我们要忠于那些灵感的原则，也就不会去看那些东西了。那些媒体电影中即或有1%能通过大卫的标准——眼前没有邪僻耳中没有谎言——就会成为希世珍品了。

有意思的是，大多数基督复临安息日会教友都同意：从好莱坞及其附属的出品中心几乎出不来什么好的。但是调查显示他们不情愿地承认时不时地在看其充满性欲的节目。1985年4月的“传道者”期刊报道了基督复临安息日会家庭关于基督徒标准的一项研究。调查者大感意外与沮丧，不得不报道说：“复临信徒抵制电影的立场似乎是一个失败的努力，我们年轻人中只有1/5与此立场一致，不到一半的父母支持传统观点…至于说离婚，珠宝与电影，我们的历史标准与教友的一般做法完全不相符合。”

据那个报道的编辑说，事实上他们发现传统的复临信徒生活方式的每一个方面都正在从现代教会中消失。他们呼吁要成立一个调查委员会来探究为什么我们的标准会这样大规模地被撇弃掉，并重新为我们的教友定义教会在这些问题上所持的立场，以及持如此立场的圣经根据。

同一年晚些时候，“复临信徒评论”（The Adventist Review）登出了一份北太平洋联合会官长们类似的呼吁。理查德•费林（Richard Fearing）会长指出在未来几年中要强调教会标准，因为“我们正处于本会的十字路口上，是要继续走在我们列为传统而有名无实的新教之路，还是要高举圣经与预言之灵的标准。我们在西北部的要坚持教会标准。”（1985年8月1日，P14）。联合会干事杰克•哈里斯（Jack Harris）预测到“在我们的大学与教会中发生的事，和教会一直教导并宣讲的道理”之间将会有一场“正面的冲突”。他指出了下述的系列问题：饮酒，看电影，参加舞会，佩带珠宝首饰不断增加，疏忽对安息日的遵守，饮用含咖啡因的饮料等等，这些都是属灵上衰退的征兆。

那篇富有挑战性的文章出现一个月后，“复临信徒评论”的一位主编回应了一则署名评论，赞赏了北太平洋联合会领袖们的勇敢立场，评论以“愿他们的支派扩张”为结束语。但不幸的是，西北领袖们无畏的榜样并没有得到其他许多人的拥护，那支派也没有如尤金•杜兰德（Eugene Durand）的评论所盼望的那样迅速扩张。事实上，除了随之而来的可称为尴尬的沉默之外，就什么也没有了。然而，理查•德费林（Richard Fearing）的话是不能被否认的。我们确实处在这个问题的十字路口上。我们或者就继续顺势下去，逐步效法流行的新教立场，或者就要拽上来，站立在最初复临教会建立的崇高道德标准的立场上。

历史证明在我们以前的每一次宗教运动都与我们现在似乎发展着的进程完全一致。那篇“传道者”期刊上的文章向我们显明了，我们正在向四围文化的大多数习惯做法迅速地挪移。（加注：如同罗得向所多玛挪移一样。）当然它并不使我们全然惊奇，因为我们从受灵感的著作中非常清楚地知道这样的背离一定会发生。怀姐妹大大流泪，描述了向世俗妥协的最后趋势会使教会分裂，带来重创的“大摇动”经验。她清晰地描述了“逐步地”和解必定发生，这种和解是为了满足社会的要求并与世俗同化而作出的。从她笔下涌流出好几百页的劝勉，反对我们所看到的正为教会与其领导层所采取的这些与世俗和解的步骤。我们所有人都对这些证言非常熟悉，但是很少人似乎愿意以此为基础，向大众发出悔改与改革的强烈呼吁。

举一个例子，她被获准听到并记录了那恶者与其邪恶的追随者们所召开的一次计划编制会。这些是撒旦对他的恶天使所说的话：

“爱宴乐过于爱上帝的人将成为我们最有效的帮助者。这类型的那些人都聪明灵巧，将成为吸引其他人进入我们网罗的诱饵。许多人都不会担心他们的影响力，因为他们宣称有同样的信仰。

这样我们就可以引导他们断定：基督的要求并没有他们一度所相信的那么严格，并且借着效法世界他们就会对那些世俗之人发挥更大的影响。

这样他们就会与基督分离，就会毫无力量抵挡我们能力了，不久他们就会嘲笑自己以前的热心与虔诚了。”——《给传道人的证言》，P474。（斜体另加，以示强调）

请注意那些聪明、灵巧、很有影响力的人是如何要被利用来使其他人相信：借着比过去少严格一些，我们就可以对世俗之人有更大的影响了。我们是何等有幸啊！上帝已经通过告诉我们这些从仇敌自己口中说出的惊人的话，把撒旦的策略揭露出来了。

如果你认为撒旦还没有实施这个计划，利用教会中深具影响力的人使这些必要条件看起来好像是太具限制性了，那么就请再来看一看。来自许多地方的声音都宣称我们一直太严格，太尊重律法了。他们说：“我们大胆反对那些特定的流行做法比如看电影，佩带珠宝首饰等，因此已经失去青年人了。不要谴责任何特定的行为。只要教导青年人爱的原则，然后无论他们怎么选择应用那原则都应该是可以接纳的标准。”

请读读以下几段话，它们是从最近一期“复临信徒评论”信件专栏摘抄出来的。答复者们就标准问题以及这些标准应该如何被教会的青年人应用的话题上发表了评论。所有这些评论都是来自本会的工人，都持有总会或是地方区会的信任证书。

“为什么不教导他们如何选择合适的服装与娱乐，而不要再就细节问题评判对错呢？”

“我们没有强调服务与爱，而似乎却专注于服装，珠宝，电影与其它我们认为是‘错’的行为。”

“我认为我们没有完全理解青年人——我们未来的领袖——当看到我们强加在他们身上的那种专制的标准时，而普遍存在的受挫感。”

“我们的青年人90%观看电影，大部分人佩带某种珠宝，我们试着要‘以善胜恶’，请他们划清界限，却没有告诉他们哪里要划清。我们讨论基督徒该选择穿什么衣服，看什么电影。他们不需要宣传标准…如果基督照我们的样子接纳我们，我们岂不照样彼此相待吗？”

“我们需要教导朴素，而不是教导‘禁戴珠宝…’但是我们长久以来专注其次，非常难改变了…当教会为戒指和电影等问题找茬挑刺时，基本的价值观却正在堕落…不是所有的电影都不好；学生们应该学着怎么选择好的电影，而不是断然地谴责影剧院…”

当牧师、教师和教会职员们能大胆地在《复临信徒评论》上肯定他们反对教会历史标准的信念时，距离那些标准被悄悄地官方地从后门请出去还会有多长时间呢？更重要的是，一个有组织的教会被它自己的领袖在它自己的杂志上公开拒绝并谴责其立场，那么它又能坚持这些立场多久呢？

请注意这个有意思的事实：所有这些事都是打着属灵的名号进行的，所使用的手段就是把努力遵行基督徒生活方式之细节要求的那些人指定为律法主义的动机。撒旦为了确保其用世俗渗进余民教会的计划奏效，已经成功地制造了惊人的谎言，使人相信那些特别捍卫标准的人是错了——他们是坏人——只有那些把细节留给个人去判断的人才是对的。这并不是说爱和关系不重要，而是说只教导那些原则却没有谈到任何在实际生活中的应用，会使得年轻人仍然不知所措。这就好像教导浸信会与卫理公会的教友关于顺从的重要原则，却不告诉他们哪一天才是安息日一样。我们无法想象每个人都会自动地被教导并确知如何应用各项细节。

的确，一些人在教导标准的方式方法上，犯过撇开爱的动机不谈的错误；但是当我们只教导爱却没有教导相应的爱的行为时，犯的错误就要严重得多了。事实就是，我们可悲地未能给出那些标准的圣经依据。这就是年轻人一直被困扰的原因了！

评论上的一些答复者暗示说教导反对电影与珠宝等等是没有有效的圣经根据的。有一封信提到“强迫接受专断的标准”。真正的问题就出在这里！如果因为那些细节的标准被领会为是专断的所以反对其应用，这我可以理解。但是这种领会是错误的。我们的标准没有一项是专断的。它们都是有圣经根据的！我就这些问题从事救灵工作四十年之久。我做牧师十八年，全职传道人二十二年，发现引导年轻人在爱上帝为至上的基础上，愉快地接受我们的标准并不成问题。我遭遇的唯一问题就是当成年人（家长，教师，等等）因为年轻人如此讲究生活方式，就开始把错误的动机强加在他们身上。最后，他们就会说服年轻人相信，在每日经验中对那些原则细节上的应用就是律法主义——正是这同样扭曲的想法贯穿在这么多《复临信徒评论》上的信件中。（1987.8.27）

主的仆人直言不讳地描绘了那欺骗性的方式，妥协正是通过这种方式悄悄潜入上帝的百姓当中：

“效法世界乃是使我们的教友迷失方向的原因。这样偏离正确原则的事，并非一旦突然发生的。主的天使用表号将这事给我指明。好像有贼偷偷摸摸的越来越接近，逐渐而肯定地，借着诱导我们的弟兄依从属世的策略而夺取上帝圣工的特性…主要求一种改革。在每一处信徒们已采用世俗原则的地方，祂盼望有警告的声音宣扬出来，‘你要大声喊叫’，祂说，‘不可止息，扬起声来好像吹角，向我的百姓说明他们的过犯，向雅各家说明他们的罪恶。’”——《举目向上看》，P202

这一灵感的证言确立了一些有意思的事实。我们被告之，正确的原则会逐步、逐步地被曲解，偷走“上帝圣工的特性”。撒旦“借着诱导我们的弟兄依从属世的策略”来完成这个缓慢的步骤。她号召

“在每一处信徒们已采用世俗原则的地方” 要扬起警告的声音，好像吹角。

这对每一位锡安的守望者来说是何等挑战啊！不可有任何一位基督复临安息日会的传道人违背上帝的命令——“大声喊叫，不可止息…向我百姓说明他们的过犯.”(赛58：1)

一些人以爱的名义，借着不在教会里提到罪来宽容“信徒们”。正当对世界的效法如贼一样“偷偷摸摸地越来越接近”之时，保留警告与责备是不良善也不仁爱的。上帝的百姓，在祂眼里是最珍贵的宝物；他们必须受到关于罪的警告——因罪使他们与救主分离。如果我们真地爱上帝，就会竭尽全力来保护祂所珍爱的那些人。祂憎恶在其百姓中间的罪。若不认清并胜过罪，就会使他们被关在天门之外。当罪在教会中出现出现的时候，若是避免直指罪名这一不受欢迎的任务，就显明守望者一方对教会缺乏关心的危险。凡因为这样做会与他们温和的天性相抵触就逃避责任的传道者，将悔之晚矣地看出：他们不愿扬起声来好像吹角是建立在自私地保护自我感情的基础上，而不是建立在上帝之爱的基础上。

“若果上帝子民中间有很明显的罪恶存在，上帝的仆人们竟熟视无睹，他们简直是维护罪人，同担其罪，也必同遭上帝之怒；因为他们是当为这些罪负责的…那些宽容罪恶的人，其实就是躲避《圣经》上明显的责任，然而众人反以为他们的生性很和平，脾气很好。纠正罪恶，有碍他们的感情，所以他们就避免之。”——《证言卷三》，P266；另见《证言精选卷一》六八•责备罪恶之责任

“真实的爱心必先求上帝的荣耀与灵命的得救。凡具有这种爱心的人，绝不会避讳真理，以免自己遭受讲实话的不愉快后果。当人灵命遇见危险时，上帝的仆人决不会顾惜自己，却要讲说所交给他传讲的话，而不肯原谅或文饰罪恶。”——《先知与君王》，P141-142

“那些具有屈从性情的人，没有勇气谴责错误，当需要他们的影响力来拥护正义、抗拒压迫时，他们竟然缄默无声；尽管他们也许逃避了许多痛心之事，躲开了许多混乱之景，但是同时他们也必丧失非常丰厚的报赏，甚或他们自己的生命。”——《证言卷三》，P302

一些牧师自我安慰说，他们太爱教友了，以至无法指出他们的罪；而事实却是，他们害怕自己在那些需要改过之人当中变得不受欢迎。尽管指出那些没有守安息日为圣之人的罪对他们来说是毫无问题的，他们却觉得在教会里指证罪可能是论断人。但是上帝说，“向我百姓说明他们的过犯。”赛58：1

不知为什么，在最后的结束工作之中圣徒当中的罪还没有被认为是一个严重的大问题。虽然没有人应认为该像侦探一样在弟兄当中行走，或者该成为异教徒的纠正者；但是每一位忠心的信徒都应该为走向世俗这一悲惨的漂流而悲痛哀哭。那些受印记之人不但会认出正在犯的罪，还会努力去纠正它们。

“有为主作工的精神，及心中志切救人的上帝忠实之子民，总必看出罪的凶恶本色来。他们必常守忠义的立场，率直地应付那易迷上帝子民的罪恶。尤其是在教会圣工结束,那站在上帝宝座之前，无瑕无疵的十四万四千人承受印记之时，他们会极乎深切地感觉到那自称为上帝子民者的罪恶。”——《证言卷三》，P266

请注意，当末后的大事越来越迫近时，教会中真实而忠心之人的特征是：“率直地应付那易迷上帝子民的罪恶.... 他们会极其深切地感觉到那自称为上帝子民者的罪恶。”

我们不可胆敢反对那些上帝引导来对付教会罪恶之人。盖印的工作与老底嘉的信息都需要这项工作做的妥当。另一方面，我们也不能支持每一位自作主张的批评家，他们扬起了尖锐刺耳之声反对教会的错误。真实的改革家会在罪人身上投射爱，为罪忧伤心痛，并深挚地忠于复临信息。但是教会中真正复兴的灵将会大胆地指出教友们正在犯的罪。

今天在复临教会中存在着一种几乎挥之不去的骄傲，在教会组织的集体结构中显出近乎着迷的自信。任何复兴与改革的信息都几乎是立即断然地被全盘拒绝，被看作是对教会的“攻击”。甚至连最忠诚、最支持教会的教友都被贴上了批评与论断的标签，就因为他们为那些标准令人担忧地流失表示忧伤与关注。我理解为什么在本会中会产生这种反应的态度。少数激进的异议者曾经不公正地攻击我们教会的领导阶层，因此很容易就认为任何负面的观察都是从真理的仇敌而来。对于所有独立自养、不完全受组织指挥的布道工作，这一错误的假定已经不时地导致了一种没有根据的怀疑。

否认已经发生的改变，或忽略已经出现的弱点是决无造就的。罪不会就此消失，复兴也不会从假装的一切良好而来。我现在面前放着1940年代，当我还是大学的神学生时的一些《评论与通讯》的复本。在那些年代里，教会领导仔细地捍卫着我们的标准，然后通过“美好的老《回顾》”传达给我们的民众。1945年10月4日的《评论与通讯》，刊登了一篇南部加州区会就基督徒标准通过的决议报告。在文章中，强调了这些行为代表“教会多年来所坚持的原则”。这是在娱乐版块中出现的：“当然，没有一位预备耶稣复临的人会在戏院、狂欢会、电影院、歌剧院、马戏场、舞会、纸牌桌旁被发现，或是出席商业运动赛…我们强烈呼吁在溜冰场与公用海水浴场方面隔绝与世俗的交接。”

同一篇文章对珠宝持坚定的反对立场，并且特别声明，“在婚誓中，不可佩带金戒指为证。”

教会在那些年代里也坚决地反对给任何没有清楚的圣经根据而再婚之人恢复教友身份。请看看现代教会的自由主义化，对这些问题的大部分都听之任之。教会官方的行动改变了我们对再婚、婚戒与混泳的立场。今天，任何支持南部加州区会1945年所站立场的人就被看为脱离复临教会的主流了。我们的年轻人被教会的大巴车载到世俗的运动竞赛场上。电影在我们自己的出版物中被描述为是个人良心选择的问题。

我提及这些事实不是要批评教会，只是要阐明一个最重要的观点：我们正在应验怀姐妹的预言，她说教会与世界之间的界限几乎要看不见了。她写道：

“在世俗之人与许多自称是基督徒之人之间的界限几乎无法分辨了。许多过去一度热心的复临信徒正在效法世界——效法其习惯、其风俗、其自私…教会正日渐变得皈依世俗。”——《证言卷八》，P118，119

有些人可能想为一些变化申辩，这些变化是向时代的精神或文化的要求所做的必要的调整。再也没有比这更错误的了。我们已被警告这类变化的危险。

“我们不应当与世人联合，以为那样行可有更大的成就....那使基督复临安息日会的信徒成为特别子民的真理，无一是可以削弱的。我们已在真理、经验、及责任上有了古道的界标，我们当在世人的眼前坚立，捍卫我们的各项原则。”——《证言卷六》， P17

我们当中谁都不该为采取上帝正要我们维护的那一立场而羞愧——要捍卫为那些使我们成为特别子民的原则。她说那使我们成为特别子民的真理，无一是可以削弱的。我们是否削弱了反对佩带装饰品的那项真理呢？我们是否削弱了关于正派服装、电影、竞赛运动、离婚与再婚的那些真理呢？逃避回答这些问题最容易的方式就是对发问者大显义愤填膺，认为他们对教会“消极否定”“吹毛求疵”。许多年前，“评论与通讯”的编辑就预见到了若开始削弱关于佩带珠宝的真理，将会发生什么事。他用几乎是先知的洞察力写道：

“如果母亲们在以色列戴起了结婚戒指，女儿们就会觉得她们照着同样的逻辑推理也就被授权可以戴订婚戒指了。其他人就会觉得他们应该戴上祖传的戒指，纪念过世友人的戒指等等。这一影响何时止息呢？界限要定在哪里呢？逻辑上要定在禁止所有的戒指这一点。”——“评论与通讯”，1920年1月20日，P6

在威尔科克斯（F.M.Wilcox）表明那些担忧的37年后，“回顾与展望”的另一位编辑尼可（F.D.Nichol）也撰写了一篇类似的评论，他说：

“比如，从结婚戒指到订婚戒指，从这两者到其它戒指，从所有这些再到耳环，它们之间的跨度并不太远。我们相信这个问题正如许多其它问题一样，我们的安全不在于观看我们到达背叛之路的边缘能有多近，而在于能离它多远。我们很清楚那被提出来要证明渐渐离开给本国教友的忠告是正当的；理由就是，也就是，美国的风俗正在改变，现在的女子必须戴上戒指以避免非议…就我们所知，那些做出如此声明的人，除了他们个人的想法外什么证据也没给出。我们非常怀疑，是否调查会显明今日的美国妇女比先前的几代更习惯于戴结婚戒指。”——“评论与通讯”，1957年1月24日

请注意这位捍卫我们信仰的伟大之人如何认识到在美国提出社会风俗变化的争论只不过是一种努力“要证明渐渐离开给本国教友的忠告是正当的”。他和那个年代几乎所有人一样，都非常清楚预言之灵关于在这个国家戴结婚戒指的灵感证言。

那两位伟大的编辑，威尔科克斯（F.M.Wilcox）和尼可（F.D.Nichol）的担忧岂不是已经被教会最近的发展证实了吗？怀著托管委员会的副秘书罗杰（Roger Coon）在他的一篇标题为“结婚戒指，怀爱伦，与基督复临安息日会”的论文中，谈到了结婚戒指面酵般的影响，描述了这个令人震惊的景象：

“事实上的确已经普遍地向珠宝敞开了大门…并且已经为默认接受其它的戒指（订婚戒指，班级戒指，友谊戒指，等等）戴在基督复临安息日会教友的手上铺平了道路。由于1970年代早期我们在北美的一些大学校园内对于戴结婚戒指的反对声减小——我们发现在1980年代早期及中期，出现了更复杂的关于珠宝的问题。”（P.16）

为什么对结婚戒指不严格的态度会导致戴上其它珠宝呢？这样提问是合宜的。答案在全球总会职员的声明中已经清楚给出了，该声明在1986年秋季会议上被采纳。在那次活动中，他们谈到，“北美基督复临安息日信徒显然一致的意见和我们这里的历史立场，都认为结婚戒指与完全为装饰之用的珠宝之间的差别微乎其微。”

既然我们的教友明白戴在第三个指头上的戒指与戴在其它指头上的戒指并无差别，就不难理解为什么当戴结婚戒指之风更加盛行时，他们就愈加要为其它珠宝申辩了。随着这种风俗在我们教会越来越得势，罗杰（Roger Coon）关于“默认接受其它戒指”的描述，还仅仅只是那要来之事的一瞥。

1987年5月，在基督复临安息日会的一所大学里，做了一项大学本科生关于结婚戒指的调查。共有211位学生做了回应，74%的人说他们认为结婚戒指和订婚戒指之间没什么区别。超过半数的男学生说他们有计划要给未来的妻子订婚戒指，78%的女学生认为如果可以接受结婚戒指，那么她们也就可以戴订婚戒指。

这些令人担忧的数据难道不应使我们重新做个严肃思考吗？——设立这出于人造而非上帝圣言的区别是否明智呢。

因为戴结婚戒指给其它有象征意味的珠宝并最终给所有的装饰品敞开了大门，所以我们应该以新的亮光来看待风俗问题。我们必须评价它，不仅依据其天然的优点或缺点评价它，而且要依据其对别的事物的影响评价它。有些人看戴结婚戒指根本不是罪的问题。然而圣经岂不是讲到我有些行为本身没有罪，但可能会成为导致别人犯罪的绊脚石吗？在这种情况下，我们岂不是要为别人的罪负责吗？

基督复临安息日会的每一位教友都应该考虑那些严肃的问题。保罗写道：“你们这样得罪弟兄们，伤了他们软弱的良心，就是得罪基督。”（林前8：12）

他在这里讲的是什么罪呢？那些哥林多信徒做了什么事伤害了人软弱的良心，成了得罪基督的呢？他们吃了祭偶像之物。那本身是罪吗？不是，保罗宣称那没有错，他们有这自由去吃。这样，为什么他还称之为罪呢？请读读这一章，你就会发现保罗称之为罪是因为吃那些食物影响了其他人违背自己良心的信念也去吃。

请不要错过这一深刻的原则！如果做一件本身无罪的事，但因你行这事的榜样影响了别人，尚且是一种罪，那么做明显违背已启示的真理的事，又因你的榜样影响了他人就更是一种罪了。当人们以你的结婚戒指为理由戴上了其它珠宝，因为其软弱的良心被你的榜样压倒了，那时上帝的圣言就宣布你是得罪基督了！

这个问题的严重性给保罗留下如此深刻的印象，以至他得出了许多人以为几乎是激进的结论：“所以，食物若叫我弟兄跌倒，我就永远不吃肉，免得叫我弟兄跌倒了。”（林前8：13）

换句话说，他不愿冒任何为他人之罪负责的危险。凡是会成为别人的绊脚石的行为，即便是无辜之举他也愿意永远不做。

总会的官长们已正确地表述了该问题。我们的教友分辨不出结婚戒指与其它珠宝的区别。他们良心的信念建立在将近一个半世纪之久的圣经与预言之灵教导之上。现在谁会想要用规则或是榜样去影响那些人，伤害他们的良心呢？这样行就被受灵感的使徒指定为罪了。

谁会像保罗那样乐意宣称说：“结婚戒指若叫我的弟兄跌倒，我就永远不戴结婚戒指，免得叫我弟兄跌倒了。”呢？

怀爱论经常使用“面酵（leavening）”这个词来描述罪在教会中的作用。字典是这样定义该词的：“通过某件事物传播，并作用于这件事物以带来一种逐渐的改变之任何一种影响力”。

记住这个概念，我们就能更好地理解该证言了：

“我对于这种在本会的人中似乎如酵发长的随风从俗之情形，深觉痛心。我们不应耗费分文，去买金环来表明我们已婚的身份。”——《给传道人的证言》，P181，另见《证言精选卷一》第110章•论约指

你还记得我们是如何受到警告说推行结婚戒指会“带来一种逐渐的改变”，正如韦氏字典所定义的吗？当怀姐妹说到不应耗费分文在一枚结婚戒指上时，她不是在谈论经济问题，而是在谈论一件更严重的事——打开大门，然后一种面酵般的变化过程就会渗透并改变整个教会。

这事岂不是已经成就了吗？我们刚才已经提出了证据，显明先知有充分的理由对这一微小但大有能力的面酵“深觉痛心”，它竟然会有如此深远的影响力。当她说“不应花费分文”在一枚结婚戒指上时，不过是在强调说明不可有人戴上它。她因为那小小的偏离会导致的后果，以及它将如何对他人产生败坏的影响而忧心忡忡。当我们看到它正如何压倒本会信徒反对珠宝的良心信念，也即我们历年修建起来的忠贞教导时，我们更加应当感到担忧。

直到1977年，总会会长威尔逊（Neal Wilson）长老才表示深信关于结婚戒指“如酵发长”的这一证言，及其如何应用于美国。在1977年1月7日北美传道大会上，他清楚地说明了戴结婚戒指在美国不是必要的。“有一个谣言在四处传播，说教会领导层已经出卖了结婚戒指。这是完全错误而不合宜的话。有些人坚持说戴结婚戒指在美国和外国都一样是非常必要的。这是有争议的。我们呼吁我们的工人，敦促我们的教友都遵守怀爱伦在《给传道人的证言》180面中的劝勉。我们反对在北美戴结婚戒指。它不是必要的。要敦促候选人坚持福音的这些要求。” （怀著托管委员会文档）

我们的教友不接受“教会领导层已经出卖了结婚戒指”的印象使威尔逊（Neal Wilson）长老担忧。他正如之前提到的“回顾与展望”的编辑一样，明白上帝的灵感证言反对戴结婚戒指，并敦促我们的工人与教友“遵守怀爱伦在《给传道人的证言》180面中的劝勉”。顺便说一下，正是那段证言宣称“不应耗费分文去买金环来表明我们已婚的身份。”（同上，P181）

五年前（译者注：本文撰于1987年，五年前即是1982年），总会的另一位会长罗伯特（Robert Pierson）长老曾以关于结婚戒指的这同一处证言为基础，为了一次复兴和改革，在“回顾与展望”上作了一次热情洋溢的呼吁。在那名为“如酵发长的随风从俗之情形”的演讲中，他诚恳地说道：

“当我看到那些极端的时尚，戒指、项链、大枚胸针、盒式小坠子、精装手表、精制男士珠宝饰物等越来越明显地在我们当中出现时，并不是那昂贵的石头最让我挂心：而是那‘如酵发长的随风从俗之情形 ’——那种骄傲，那种专爱自己，那种爱世界，那种妥协——那就是这些事物所透露的信息，使我为上帝的百姓担忧挂虑…我们有太多的人正在掉头回到世界中去。若对世界的爱在我们心里面，爱父的心就不可能也在那里了。”——“评论与通讯”，1971年12月17日

很显然，我们已经来到了一个时期，“真理、经验与责任的古道界标”需要重新被确立并巩固。怀姐妹指出，“我们当在世人的眼前坚立，捍卫我们的各项原则。”

Chapter 6  ATTACKING THE LAST GENERATION

　　Now we are prepared to look into the classic strategy of Satan as he applies his sin-bait to earth's final generation of Seventh-day Adventists. While focusing on his refined, disguised appeal-package for the last days, we must not forget that he will use other weapons also to weaken the remnant. In fact, he has already shaken the faith of thousands by raising up articulate inside dissenters and critics of the three angels' messages. The true doctrine of righteousness by faith has been diluted by g excluding sanctification; the Spirit of Prophecy has been attacked; the law has been downgraded; the judgment message has been emasculated-in fact, these sharp, frontal attacks on the basic pillars of the faith have yielded unexpected results in terms of apostasy.

　　"The demon of heresy has mapped out the world, and has resolved to possess it as his kingdom. Those who are in his army are numerous. They are disguised, and are subtle and persevering. They resist every divine influence, and employ every instrumentality in order to compass the ruin of even one soul. They possess a zeal, tact, and ability that is marvelous, and press their way into every new opening where the standard of truth is uplifted." The Upward Look, p. 275.

　　"Many will stand in our pulpits with the torch of false prophecy in their hands, kindled from the hellish torch of Satan." Testimonies to Ministers, pp, 409, 410.

　　Nevertheless, the great majority have not been influenced to give up their faith because of heretical teachings. It seems very likely that they will never be swayed from the truth by theological arguments against the foundational doctrines, at least not in their present state of mind. For these Adventists, Satan sees that another approach is needed to unsettle their faith. If he can't influence them to give up the Sabbath through intellectual appeals, he will use emotional appeals-the same kind that worked so well against Eve and the Israelites. If he can create an atmosphere that causes the spiritual mind to relax and allow him to start accessing even one of the five sensory lanes, he will have a chance to capture the main terminal of decision and will, the brain.

　　Look around you today and witness the most masterful array of satanic instruments and devices ever assembled at one time on this planet. Every one of them has been designed to get a small foothold in somebody's mind. Except for their more varied forms and sophisticated appeal they have been fashioned after the Eden model, with the object in mind to break down the enmity between the Christian and the world.

　　Right here it might be in order to make a few specific observations on what is wrong with the world. Consider these broad, basic factors which place the world in diametrical opposition to biblical principles:

　　ITS LANGUAGE. None can avoid the shock of exposure to the rapid deterioration of this medium. Not only are we hearing more profane and vulgar words in the market place where we all must interrelate from time to time, but the formal channels of radio, television and newspapers are being saturated with expletives which offend the spiritual senses. It has become popular and quite acceptable for media personalities to sprinkle their commentaries with gutter language.

　　An article entitled, A Protocol for Female Cussing appeared in The Washington Post July 8, 1987. The shocking thrust of the article was in defense of the, increasing use of profanity by women. The lady (?) columnist wrote:

　　"As long as women abide by certain conventions----what might be termed 'business swearing etiquette'----they can get away with, and even benefit from, the judicious use of profanity.

　　"This new linguistic license for women has come about because swearing in the work place is reportedly on the upswing among both sexes. The increase has been variously attributed to the trend toward informality, the decline of religion, the heightening pressures in the work place and, among the age group that can remember it, t h e revolution of the '60s. Whatever the reason, women have simply picked up the language of the locker room while they were learning the game from men. And, as many have found, colorful language often comes in handy."

　　Then follows a list of advantages for women who can master the indelicacies of proper swearing and cursing. Said the author, "Although cursing like a sailor is guaranteed to destroy one's femininity rating, it can be an effective strategy for some women."

　　Without question, the more we mingle with the world, the more our own conversation will be infected with slang expressions which unconsciously lead to larger infractions of God's "yea and nay" rule of communication.

　　Many Seventh-day Adventists have incorporated the polite swearing of popular "slanguage" without realizing that it is really taking God's name in vain. According to the dictionary, words like "gee," "golly," and "gosh" are actual derivatives of the names of deity. In many instances, substitute words are used instead of God's name----words which describe the attributes of God----and those synonyms are used freely in careless, casual conversation. Often such expressions are heard even from the pulpit. "For goodness' sake" is merely replacing the word "God" for one of His attributes. The same is true of such phrases as "for heaven's sake" and "for pity sake." If holy, sinless angels veil their faces when they speak His name, how much more reverently should fallen beings take God's sacred name and titles upon their lips.

　　ITS MATERIALISM. Every aspect of modern society is laden with this grasping spirit of self-aggrandizement. Success is measured by just one factor----income. When reports are given on the newscast about prominent people leaving positions in government or industry, there is the inevitable reference to their new salary which motivated their transfer.

　　Recognition of worth, merit, and success is always related to the kind of contract one can secure from the employing organization. Much of the media content revolves around strikes, union demands, and contract holdouts. From medical doctors to airline pilots to football teams, the primary goal seems to be mercenary; and materialistic. Rarely indeed is the professional or governmental public servant dedicated to the higher principle of serving others.

　　ITS DECEPTION. A recent issue of Newsweek, magazine featured LYING on its front cover. Most of the content focused upon the universally-accepted, unspoken principle of telling lies in order to achieve goals. The great majority of people take it for granted that subterfuge and deception is a standard element in the business world. Advertising is almost wholly based upon misrepresentation. Few ads indeed are totally free of distorted concepts.

　　During the Iran-Contra hearings, Americans were, shocked to learn that many functions of government are also rooted in covert actions requiring deliberate misrepresentation. Departmental policies require agents of this government to tell lies both to the public and to foreign powers. Listening to the logical explanation of why such lying was done under the prevailing circumstances, many Christians were almost persuaded that it's not really so bad after all. I had to resist the temptation to agree with Colonel North as he described the necessity of misleading everyone concerning the true nature of his operation.

　　Is the general public favorably disposed to all this business and governmental deceit and cover-up of the truth? The fact is that this lying format is a way of life for almost everyone. Each time I ride a plane, I watch the people around me with their heads buried in colorful, paperback novels. During that entire flight, they are living a lie. Their emotions are under the direct control of the author's imaginative fantasies. Between the novels and the television movies, their minds have been permeated with make-believe characters embroiled in fictitious plots, making the lies of real life almost innocuous and inconsequential in comparison.

　　ITS SELFISHNESS. Have you noticed that the most popularized concepts today are geared to making it to the top? There is a constant competition to be the greatest, the richest or the strongest. When legitimate means fail to exalt self, some people turn to crime or violence to achieve recognition.

　　All commercialized sports are based on the principle of self-exaltation at the expense of others, and at any cost. The newspapers are full of stories about fights, bribes, or drugs in almost every area of professional sports. Greedy players hold out for multi-million dollar contracts, and the more they can extract for their season of play, the more they are admired and idolized.

　　Even the most staid and respected brokerage offices of Wall Street have been exposed as accomplices in stealing millions from corporations of America in the ultimate scam scheme. And the epitome of selfishness and egotism is revealed in the televangelist scandal with its sordid revelations of sin in high places.

　　ITS PRIDE. Even some of the worldly commentators have observed the ridiculous tides of modern dress and undress. As styles shift back and forth, Christians are swept along in the wake of whatever is most popular at the moment. They struggle to meet the test of fashion, no matter how scandalous it is, rather than the inspired principles of modesty and good taste. Miniskirts come and go, and a very few men----many of them homosexuals----actually dictate the kind of clothes most Americans will be wearing during the coming season. Can we not understand why Sister White had so much to say about the subject of modest attire?

　　ITS SEX OBSESSION. This is probably one of the most obvious carnal manifestations of Satan's control of this planet. Filthy, obscene words, which were not even whispered among decent people a few years ago have now become the major topic on popular television panels. The most sacred, private acts and relationships have been lowered to the level of mocking, hilarious talk shows, and absolutely nothing has been spared.

　　Birth control devices have been advertised in the public media, discussed in high school forums, and explained to elementary school children.

　　Every aspect of advertising has been filled with sexual innuendos and double talk. It is now impossible for Christians not to see and hear snatches of evil elements from Satan's kingdom of darkness. But by God's grace and power, those wicked perversions can be screened from entering the mind which is under divine control. Yet few today seem to be taking firm, protective stances against these assorted, blatant attacks of worldliness.

　　Is it hard to understand why God always kept His people away from these corrupt influences? They will become a part of our value system if we do not devise special ways to protect ourselves. It happens automatically if we mix with them, listen to them, and erect no barriers of separation. This is the reason we can't recognize church members as readily as we could years ago; they dress, eat, and talk very much like the fleshly world around them. Most of the change can be credited to the mischievous influence of what is fed into the mind.

　　Many fail to recognize the destructive nature of indiscriminate reading habits. Minds have been disqualified for serious Bible study by dwelling on cheap, trashy themes. My own break with such literature came as a result of reading Messages to Young People when I was ten or eleven years old. No one had to prove to me that the statements were true. My compulsive addiction to exciting stories had robbed me of any real joy in Christ, and I knew they had to go. Words like these burned my conscience like fire:

　　"The readers of fiction are indulging an evil that destroys spirituality, eclipsing the beauty of the sacred page. It creates an unhealthy excitement, fevers the imagination, unfits the mind for usefulness, weans the soul from prayer, and disqualifies it for any spiritual exercise." Messages to Young People, p. 272.

　　For a while, I tried to rationalize my appetite for historical and religious novels, but deep inside I knew what they were doing to me. Three statements finally convinced me that there could be no compromise in my decision.

　　"The enormities, the cruelties, the licentious practices, portrayed in some of the strictly historical writings have acted as leaven on many minds, leading to the commission of similar acts.

　　"Books that delineate the satanic practices of human beings are giving publicity to evil. These horrible particulars need not be lived over, and no one who believes the truth for this time should act a part in perpetuating the memory of them." Messages to Young People, p. 284.

　　"Love stories, frivolous and exciting tales, and even that class of books called religious novels,----books in which the author attaches to his story a moral lesson,----are a curse to the readers. Religious sentiments may be woven all through a story-book, but, in most cases, Satan is but clothed in angel robes, the more effectively to deceive and allure." Messages to Young People, p. 272.

　　"Even fiction which contains no suggestion of impurity, and which may be intended to teach excellent principles, is harmful. It encourages the habit of hasty and superficial reading, merely for the story. Thus it tends to destroy the power of connected and vigorous thought; it unfits the soul to contemplate the great problems of duty and destiny....

　　"It is often urged that in order to win the youth from sensational or worthless literature, we should supply them with a better class of fiction. This is like trying to cure a drunkard by giving him, in the place of whisky or brandy, the milder intoxicants, such as wine, beer, or cider. The use of these would continually foster the appetite for stronger stimulants. The only safety for the inebriate, and the only safeguard for the temperate man, is total abstinence. For the lover of fiction the same rule holds true. Total abstinence is his only safety." Counsels to Parents and Teachers, pp. 383, 384.

　　Would this explain the weak witness of so many Seventh-day Adventist Christians today? How hard it is to deal with spiritual realities when the mind, like a garbage collection center, is overflowing with the refuse of all that has filtered through it. The Spirit of God cannot communicate through physical nerve channels that have been deadened by such a surcharge of filth.

　　Try to visualize that your brain becomes a permanent repository of the essential ideas and principles which pour into it from all the books you read. If the sentiments contained in that reading matter are not true and pure and virtuous, then they leave a mental scar that may never heal. For years to come, there will be flashbacks of recollection, bringing fresh impressions of those impure sentiments. Even after my baptism, I still remember battling against those recurring memories of past reading material.



　　This brings into focus one of the most destructive effects of wrong reading habits. The way in which the brain is constituted, with its billions of neural connections and its memory bank, makes it almost impossible to ever blot out entirely the residual influence of that which is read. Once it has entered into the learning center of the mind, it becomes almost a permanent part of the knowledge pool from which all decision and action is drawn.

　　The fact is that when we open our minds to the concentrated thoughts and ideas of unchristian authors, we are also consenting for their mind-set to become a part of our own thought pattern. Eventually, it also translates into the kind of character we develop. What a solemn thought it is that every book we read is making us just a little bit like the person who wrote it, in both mind and character. In effect, we are allowing someone else to make the decision as to the kind of person we are going to be.

　　Word pictures have the same power to stir the imagination as real pictures do. This is why intense readers can be so deeply absorbed in the plot of their story. Their emotions are affected in the same way as television viewers. Mentally, they actually participate in all the actions of their hero or heroine in the make-believe situation. Pulse races, tears flow, and all the other physical reactions follow as they are vicariously involved in the good or evil being graphically described by the author.

　　Can it be a dangerous practice to yield the mind and emotions to the performance of all the deeds of imaginary characters in a book? In such cases, the writer is creating and controlling your every thought and mood. By his skill with words, he is pulling you into the scene and compelling you to share the joy, sorrow or guilt of every person being portrayed.

　　Does God hold us accountable for sins which are only carried out in the mind? Yes. He declared: "Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her bath committed adultery with her already in his heart." Matthew 5:28. Can we not see then how Satan is able to stir up sin in millions of minds by simply manipulating the thoughts and words of one unprincipled author? It is mind-boggling to consider how Christians can be so easily transformed into Satan's own image if they allow themselves to feed on the wrong reading material. Wrote the prophet:

　　"When the intellect is fed and stimulated by this depraved food, the thoughts become impure and sensual." Messages to Young People, p. 284.

　　Whether we realize it or not, the author of what we read is placing a mold upon our life which can produce eternal consequences. Many will be lost as a result of absorbing the doubts of skeptical writers. Others may be lost by saturating their minds with the permissiveness of so-called Christian authors who subtly communicate false, liberal ideas about God and the Bible. It is of the utmost importance that we carefully examine and test all our reading material by the apostle's rule: "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things." Philippians 4:8.

　　Consider for a few moments the artificial, glamorized appeal of the theater. Almost one hundred percent of its adulterated fare is designed to destroy religious impressions. What possible reason would a Christian have for sitting under the hypnotic influence of its foul language and distorted moral concepts? What messages are being conveyed into the memory banks of the master brain computer? We have found that God created the cells of the mind to configure with whatever the communication lines bring in from the five senses. Why would one with a Christ-controlled, converted mind find such scenes enjoyable or entertaining? They could not. It is impossible for the mind of Christ to accept anything which is not pure and true and virtuous. Only the carnal mind delights in the kind of productions pouring out of Hollywood.

　　Are there sound principles behind the long-held position of this church against attendance at the theater? Did Sister White manufacture her strong prohibitive statements on this subject, or did she indeed receive them from the Lord? If the theater was a dangerous, questionable place for Christians a hundred years ago, has it become less objectionable today? These are issues that need to be settled by every Seventh-day Adventist.

　　Two very important principles make it impossible for the movie house to be a part of the Adventist lifestyle. How can a true child of God conscientiously patronize and keep in business an enterprise which spends ninety-nine percent of its time destroying everything which we are trying to build up one hundred percent of our time? It doesn't make sense. How can we support such an operation which is diametrically opposed to everything we stand for? There should be a tremendous moral aversion to helping maintain an institution which is corrupting and destroying so many minds.

　　The second principle involved in theater-going is the moral influence issue. Non-Christians who see a Seventh-day Adventist enter the theater do not assume that he is going in there to see that "one-in-a-hundred" picture which might meet the Bible test; he assumes that this professing saint of God is feeding on the same run-of-the-mill garbage that he enjoys. What a twisted testimony! And what a travesty on the pure, exalted religion of Jesus Christ!

　　If you want to read an amazing statement about the influence of television and movies, consider these words which were written under inspiration over fifty years before motion pictures were invented.

　　"By beholding we become changed. By the indulgence of impure thoughts man can so educate his mind that sin which he once loathed can become pleasant to him. Satan is using every means to make crime and debasing vice popular.... The mind is educated to familiarity with sin. The course pursued by the base and vile is kept before the people in the periodicals of the day, and everything that can excite passion is brought before them in exciting stories. They hear and read so much of debasing crime that the once tender conscience, which would have recoiled with horror from such scenes, becomes hardened, and they dwell upon these things with greedy interest." Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 459.

　　Mrs. White could not have described the picture more perfectly if she had been viewing last night's Nielsen-rated detective drama in person. Not only are we made familiar with sin, but we become tolerant of sin as well. There are sound psychological reasons why the mind becomes totally conditioned by what is seen on television. The deliberate, fast-scene-changing of flashing TV pictures does not give the conscious mind time to evaluate or censor what is being viewed. Research has proven that the rapid-fire sequence of pictures actually bypasses the critical judgment of the conscious brain and feeds directly into the subconscious. Without our being aware of it, the mind is cleverly influenced to be more and more acceptant of what is seen and heard.

　　We may pride ourselves on being able to tune out commercials and programs we don't like, but they are scientifically designed, at the expense of millions of dollars, to shape our thinking WHETHER WE CHOOSE IT OR NOT! There is no such thing as innocent TV programming. Subliminal advertising has guaranteed that every viewer will be influenced, with or without his consent or agreement. Satan's messages are being communicated even through the most innocent-appearing ads and commercials.

　　A few days ago, a catalogue came in my mailbox from a company called Mind Communication, Incorporated. It advertised hundreds of subliminal audio and video tapes which were touted to be one hundred percent effective in providing "effortless self-improvement" for almost every character weakness known to man.

　　The tapes were described in these words: "A series of subliminal messages are hidden or 'disguised' within a background sound of music or waves. The messages are placed at a slightly lower decibel level than that of the music. The messages are then 'piggy-backed' into the listeners brain along with the music, but without the listener's awareness of having received them. The messages are just below conscious detection level."

　　The video tapes on weight control and smoking were described as so potent that "it is nearly impossible for the subconscious mind to resist the energy and power of our subliminal videos. These videos bombard and saturate your brain cells so totally that you become ready, able and willing to lose weight or throw away the cigarettes----now and forever."

　　Red-letter warning notices throughout the catalogue state: "Maximum strength weight-loss video tape causes weight loss in those who view and/or listen to it. Do not play in the presence of those not needing to lose weight."

　　We would be naive to think that such a powerful advertising tool is not being used by greedy corporations to sell their products. No one knows the full extent to which subliminal commercials have invaded the world of media advertising. What we do know is that we cannot depend upon the conscience of big business to save us from subliminal influences; we must take steps to protect our own minds from unwelcome invasion.

　　What can we say about Seventh-day Adventist Christians who feed for hours at a time upon the polluted, filthy double-talk of soap operas and sitcoms? There is not a tiny chance that they can love spiritual things and carnal things at the same time. The Bible says, "If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." James 4:4. It is not presumptuous or judgmental to say that those people are not truly converted.

　　How Satan must rejoice as he watches the television set destroy the mind's ability to discriminate between the clean and the unclean. God's plea is ignored, "My son, give me thine heart, and let thine eyes observe my ways." Proverbs 23:26. No one could possibly believe the movie screen to be a reflector of God's ways.

　　David, whose eyes had led him to lust and murder, leaves this powerful personal testimony: "I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes ... he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my sight." Psalm 101:3, 7. If David could not resist the temptation which was unintentionally brought before his eyes, what can we say about those who deliberately bring the temptation into their living room through television? Undoubtedly more nakedness can be seen nightly on TV than David observed in his few moments of watching long ago, and the effect on the mind is just as demoralizing and enslaving as it was upon David. The fallen nature, for six thousand years, has been stimulated by exactly the same carnal appeals.

　　After he was restored from his terrible backsliding, David determined that his eyes would never again look upon evil. As a man after God's own heart, he would "set" no evil thing before his eyes. David was not talking about a TV "set," of course, but he was committed to follow no course that would bring such enticing scenes to his vision again. Neither would he allow him "that telleth lies" to "tarry in my sight." If David remained true to those principles, he certainly would never choose to attend a theater or feast on the common diet of modern television. And if we are going to be true to those inspired principles, we will not choose to look at those things either. It would be a rare mixture for even one out of a hundred of those media films to meet David's criteria of not being evil to the sight or telling lies to the ears.

　　The interesting fact is that most Seventh-day Adventists agree that there is almost nothing good coming out of Hollywood and its affiliated production centers. Yet surveys reveal that they reluctantly admit to watching, from time to time, their sex-saturated programs. The April, 1985 Ministry magazine reported on a study of Seventh-day Adventist families relating to Christian standards. To their surprise and dismay, the surveyors had to report: "The Adventist stand on movies appears a lost cause, with only a fifth of our youth in harmony with it, and less than half their parents supporting the traditional view.... As to divorce, jewelry, and the movies, our historical positions simply do not correspond to our members' general practice."

　　The fact is that every aspect of traditional Adventist lifestyle was found to be disappearing from the modern church, according to the compilers of the report. They urged that a research committee be set up to probe the reasons for such wholesale abandonment of our standards, and to redefine for our members where the church stands on these issues, and the biblical basis for such a stand.

　　Later that year, The Adventist Review printed a similar appeal from the officers of the North Pacific Union Conference. President Richard Fearing stated that church standards would be emphasized in the next few years because "we are at a crossroads in this church as to whether we will go the way of what we classify as mainline, nominal Protestantism, or whether we will uphold the standards of Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy. We, in the Northwest, are going to hold to the standards of the church." (August 1, 1985, p. 14.) Jack Harris, Union Conference Secretary, predicted that there j would be a "head-on collision between what is happening in our colleges and churches, and what the church has been teaching and preaching." He pointed to problems in the use of alcohol, attendance at movies and dances, increased wearing of jewelry, lax Sabbath observance and use of caffeinated drinks, as signs of spiritual declension.

　　A month after that challenging article appeared, an editor of The Adventist Review responded with an editorial of endorsement, applauding the leaders of the North Pacific Union for their bold stand, and closing with the words "May their tribe increase." Unfortunately, that gutsy example by the Northwest leadership was not acclaimed by too many others, and the tribe did not mushroom as Eugene Durand's editorial dared to hope. In fact, there ensued nothing more than what can be described as an embarrassed silence. Nevertheless, the words of Richard Fearing cannot be negated. We do stand at the crossroads on this issue. We either continue the course of gradual conformity to the popular Protestant position, or we draw back and take our stand upon the original Adventist foundation of high moral standards.

　　History reveals that every religious movement before us has followed exactly the same course that we seem to be now taking. The Ministry magazine article shows us moving rapidly to the side of the majority practices of our surrounding culture. It has certainly not taken us totally by surprise, because we understood very well from the inspired writings that such a deviation would take place. Sister White, with many tears, described the final movements of worldly compromise that would divide the church and bring a traumatic "shaking" experience. She wrote graphically about the "step by step" accommodations that would be made to social demands and worldliness. Literally hundreds of pages of counsel flowed from her pen against the very steps that we see being taken by the church and its leadership. All of us are acquainted with those statements, yet few seem willing to make them the basis of a strong public call to repentance and reformation.

　　In one instance, she was permitted to hear and record an actual planning session of the evil one with his demon followers. These are the words Satan used in addressing his evil angels:

　　"Lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God will be our most effective helpers. Those of this class who are apt and intelligent will serve as decoys to draw others into our snares. Many will not fear their influence, because they profess the same faith. We will thus lead them to conclude that the requirements of Christ are less strict than they once believed, and that by conformity to the world they would exert a greater influence with worldlings. Thus they will separate from Christ; they will have no strength to resist our power, and erelong they will be ready to ridicule their former zeal and devotion." Testimonies to Ministers, p. 474. (Emphasis supplied.)

　　Notice how apt, intelligent, influential members will be used to convince others that we can have greater influence on worldlings by being less strict than in the past. How fortunate we are that God has exposed the tactics of Satan by giving us this amazing account from our enemy's own lips.

　　If you think Satan has not already launched that program of using influential people in the church to make the requirements seem too restrictive, take another look. From many quarters voices are proclaiming that we have been too strict and legalistic. We have lost our young people, they say, by speaking out against specific, popular activities such as movie-attendance and wearing jewelry. Don't condemn any particular practices. Just teach the youth the principle of love, and however they choose to apply it should be the accepted standard.

　　Please read the following paragraphs which were lifted from the Letters Column of a recent Adventist Review. Respondents were commenting on the subject of standards and how they should be applied to young people in the church. All of these statements were made by denominational workers who carry credentials from the General Conference, or from local conferences.

　　"Why not teach them how to choose appropriate dress and entertainment and quit trying to judge the rightness or wrongness of specifics?"

　　"Instead of emphasizing service and love, we seem to focus on dress, jewelry, movies or other behavior we think is 'wrong. '"

　　"I don't think we fully grasp the widespread frustrations youth----our future leaders----feel as they view the arbitrary standards we impose upon them."

　　"With 90 percent of our youth attending movies, and the majority wearing some kind of jewelry, we try to 'overcome evil with good' by asking them to draw the line SOMEWHERE, rather than telling them where to draw it. We discuss how a Christian chooses what to wear or what movies to see. They don't need standards preached.... If Christ accepts us as we are, don't we owe the same to each other?"

　　"We need to teach simplicity rather than 'no jewelry....' But we have majored in minors so long it will be difficult to change.... Basic values are falling while the church quibbles over rings and movies.... All movies are not bad; students should learn how to choose the good rather than categorically condemning the theater...."

　　When pastors and teachers, employees of the church, can boldly affirm in the Review their convictions against the historic standards of the church, how long will it be before those standards are quietly and officially ushered out the back door? Even more significantly, how long can an organized church continue to hold positions which are publicly rejected and denounced in its own journals by its own leaders?

　　Please notice the interesting fact that this is all being done in the name of spirituality, and by assigning legalistic motives to all who attempt to obey specifics of Christian lifestyle. In order to guarantee the success of his program to infiltrate the remnant church with worldliness, Satan has succeeded in generating the incredible falsehood that those who take specific stands on standards are in the wrong-they are the bad guys-and only those who leave details to individual judgment are correct. This is not to say that love and relationship are not important, but to teach those principles WITHOUT making any application to real life leaves the young people still floundering. It is like teaching Baptists and Methodists the important principle of obedience without telling them which day the Sabbath is. We cannot assume that everyone will automatically be taught and convicted on how to apply the details.

　　No doubt mistakes have been made by some in their MANNER of teaching standards, leaving out the love motive, but a much worse mistake is made when we teach only love without the corresponding works of love. The truth is that we have miserably failed to give Bible reasons for our standards. This is why the youth have been confused!

　　Some of the Review respondents implied that there is no valid biblical basis for teaching against movies, jewelry, etc. One letter spoke of the "imposition of arbitrary standards." HERE IS THE REAL PROBLEM! I can understand opposition to applying specific standards if they are perceived as arbitrary. But this is a misperception. None of our standards are arbitrary. They are biblical! For forty years I have dealt with souls over these issues. As a pastor for eighteen years and a fulltime evangelist for twenty-two years, I found no difficulty in leading young people into a joyful acceptance of our standards, based upon loving God supremely. The only problem I encountered was when adults (parents, teachers, etc.) began to impute wrong motives to the youth for being so particular about their lifestyle. Finally they were able to convince the young people that it is legalistic to make such detailed application of principle to the daily experience-the same twisted idea that came through in so many of the Review letters. (August 27, 1987.)

　　The servant of the Lord minced no words in describing the deceptive manner in which compromise would infiltrate the ranks of God's people:

　　"It is conformity to the world that is causing our people to lose their bearings. The perversion of right principles has not been brought about suddenly. The angel of the Lord presented this matter to me in symbols. It seemed as if a thief were stealthily moving closer and still closer, and gradually but surely stealing away the identity of God's work by leading our brethren to conform to worldly policies.... The Lord calls for a reformation. In every place where believers have adopted worldly principles, He desires a voice of warning to be raised. 'Cry aloud,' He says, 'spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins."' The Upward Look, p. 202.

　　Some interesting facts are established by this inspired statement. We are told that right principles will be perverted very, very gradually, stealing away the "identity of God's work." This slow process will be accomplished by Satan "leading our brethren to conform to worldly policies." She calls for a voice of warning to be raised like a trumpet "in every place where believers have adopted worldly principles."

　　What a challenge to every watchman in Zion! Not one Seventh-day Adventist minister should disobey the command of God to "Cry aloud, spare not ... show my people their transgression." Isaiah 58:1.

　　In the name of love, some are sparing the "believers" by not addressing sins in the church. It is not kind or loving to withhold warnings and reproofs as conformity to the world, like a thief, is "stealthily moving closer and still closer." God's people, the most precious treasure in His sight, must be warned about sins which are separating them from their Saviour. If we truly love God, we will seek in every possible way to safeguard those who are the apple of His eye. He hates sin in His people. It will shut them out of Heaven if not recognized and overcome. To avoid the unpleasant assignment to point out sin as it appears in the church is to demonstrate a dangerous lack of concern on the part of watchmen. Ministers who shun this duty because it goes against their gentle natures will learn too late that their reluctance to lift up their voice like a trumpet was based on a selfish protection of their own feelings instead of love for God.

　　"If wrongs are apparent among His people, and if the servants of God pass on indifferent to them, they virtually sustain and justify the sinner, and are alike guilty and will just as surely receive the displeasure of God; for they will be made responsible for the sins of the guilty.... Those who have excused these wrongs have been thought by the people to be very amiable and lovely in disposition, simply because they shunned to discharge a plain Scriptural duty. The task was not agreeable to their feelings; therefore they avoided it." Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 266.

　　"True love seeks first the honor of God and the salvation of souls. Those who have this love will not evade the truth to save themselves from the unpleasant results of plain speaking. When souls are in peril, God's ministers will not consider self, but will speak the word given them to speak, refusing to excuse or palliate evil." Prophets and Kings, pp. 141-142.

　　"While those who have yielding temperaments, who have not courage to condemn wrong, but keep silent when their influence is needed to stand in defense of the right against any pressure, may avoid many heartaches and escape many perplexities, they will also lose a very rich reward, if not their own souls." Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 302.

　　Some pastors console themselves that they love the church members too much to point out their sins, when the truth is that they are fearful of becoming unpopular with those who need correction. They have no problem pointing out the sins of those who are not keeping the Sabbath holy, but they feel that it would be judgmental to identify sins in the church. But God says, "SHOW MY PEOPLE THEIR TRANSGRESSION." Isaiah 58:1.

　　Somehow sin among the saints has not been recognized as a great issue in the closing work. Though none should feel assigned to go about as a detective of the brethren or corrector of heretics, yet every faithful believer should weep in sorrow over the tragic drift toward the world. Those who are sealed will not only recognize the sins which are being committed, but will seek to correct them.

　　"The true people of God, who have the spirit of the work of the Lord and the salvation of souls at heart, will ever view sin in its real, sinful character. They will always be on the side of faithful and plain dealing with sins which easily beset the people of God. Especially in the closing work for the church, in the sealing time of the one hundred and forty-four thousand who are to stand without fault before the throne of God, will they feel most deeply the wrongs of God's professed people." Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 266.

　　Please take note that as the final events draw closer, the true and faithful in the church will be characterized by their "plain dealing with sins which easily beset the people of God.... They feel most deeply the wrongs of God's professed people."

　　We dare not oppose those who are led to deal with sins in the church. The sealing work and the Laodicean message requires that it be done. On the other hand, we cannot defend every self-appointed critic who raises a strident voice against wrongs in the church. True reformers will project love for the sinner, heart-broken sorrow for the sin, and deep loyalty to the advent message. But a genuine spirit of revival in the church will boldly address the sins which are being committed by the members themselves.

　　There exists in the Adventist church today an almost obsessive pride and confidence in the corporate structure of the organization. Any message of revival and reform is almost instantly and categorically rejected as an "attack" on the church. Even the most loyal, supportive members of the church have been branded as critical and judgmental because they expressed sorrow and concern over the alarming drift in standards. I understand why this reactive attitude has developed in the denomination. There have been unjustified attacks against the leadership of our church by a few radical dissidents and it is easy to assume that any negative observation is coming from an enemy of the truth. This false assumption has sometimes resulted in an unwarranted suspicion toward all independent or self-supporting missionary work which is not fully under the direction of the organized body.

　　It does no good to deny that changes have taken place, or to ignore the weaknesses that have appeared. Sin doesn't go away and revival doesn't come by pretending that all is well. I have before me right now copies of the Review and Herald from the 1940s when I was a college and seminary student. In those days our standards were carefully defended by church leaders and then were communicated to our people through the pages of the "good old Review." In the October 4, 1945 Review and Herald, a report was made of resolutions passed by the Southern California Conference in regard to Christian standards. It was emphasized in the article that these actions represented "principles held by the church through long years." Here is what appeared under the section on amusements: "Surely no one preparing for the coming of Jesus will be found at the theater, the carnival, the movie house, the opera, the circus, the dance, the card table or in attendance at commercialized sports.... We strongly urge separating from worldly associations at skating rinks and public bathing beaches."

　　The same article took a strong stand against jewelry and stated specifically, "No circlet of gold should be worn as a testimony to marriage vows." The church in those days also held adamantly against taking anyone back into membership who had remarried without clear Bible grounds. Look at the liberalization of the modern church on most of these issues. We have altered by official action our stand on remarriage, the wedding ring, and mixed swimming. And today, anyone who stands where the Southern California Conference stood in 1945 is looked upon as out of the mainstream of Adventism. Our youth are transported by church buses to worldly athletic competition events. Movies are described in our own publications as matters for individual conscience to decide.

　　I do not mention these facts to be critical of the church, but merely to illustrate a most important point: We are fulfilling Sister White's prophecy that the line of demarcation would well-nigh disappear between the church and the world. She wrote:

　　"The line of demarcation between worldlings and many professed Christians is almost indistinguishable. Many who were once earnest Adventists are conforming to the world-to its practices, its customs, its selfishness.... Daily the church is becoming converted to the world." Testimonies, Vol. 8, pp. 118, 119.

　　Some would defend the changes which have been made as necessary accommodations to the spirit of the age or to cultural demands. Nothing could be more mistaken. We have been warned about the danger of such changes.

　　"We are to enter into no confederacy with the world, supposing that by so doing we could accomplish more.... No line of truth that has made the Seventh-day Adventist people what they are, is to be weakened. We have the old landmarks of truth, experience, and duty, and we are to stand firmly in defense of our principles, in full view of the world." Testimonies, Vol. 6, p. 17.

　　None of us should be ashamed to take a position exactly where God counsels us to stand-in defense of those principles which have made us what we are as a people. She says that no line of truth that made us what we are is to be weakened. Have we weakened that line of truth against the wearing of ornaments? Have we weakened the line of truth on modest dress, movies, competitive sports, divorce and remarriage? The easiest way to avoid answering those questions is to begin showing great indignation against the questioner for being "negative" and "critical" of the church. Many years ago the editor of the Review and Herald foresaw what would happen if we ever began to weaken that line of truth concerning the wearing of jewelry. He wrote with almost prophetic insight:

　　"If the mothers in Israel wear wedding rings, the daughters will feel that they are entitled by the same logic of reasoning to wear engagement rings. Others will feel that they should wear rings as family heirlooms, in memory of dead friends, etc. Where will the influence cease? Where should the line be drawn? Logically at the point of prohibition of all rings." Review and Herald, January 8, 1920, p. 6.

　　Thirty-seven years after F. M. Wilcox expressed those fears, another editor of the Review and Herald, F. D. Nichol, wrote a similar editorial in which he stated:

　　"It is not a far step, for example, from wedding rings to engagement rings, and from both of these to other rings, and from all of these to earrings. We believe that in this matter, as in many others, our safety lies, not in seeing how near we can come to the treacherous edge of the road, but how far we can stay away. We are well aware of the reasoning employed to justify the drift away from the counsel given to our membership in the homeland; namely, that custom is changing in America and that now a woman must wear a ring to avoid criticism.... So far as we know, those who make such statements do not provide any proof other than their personal impression. We doubt very much whether research would reveal that American women today are more given to wearing a wedding ring than in former generations." Review and Herald, January 24, 1957.

　　Notice how this great defender of our faith recognized that the argument about changing social customs in America was simply an effort "to justify the drift away from the counsel given to our membership in the homeland." Like almost everyone else in those days, he was very clear on the inspired counsel of the Spirit of Prophecy about wearing a wedding ring in this country.

　　Have the fears of those two editorial giants, F. M. Wilcox and F. D. Nichol, been confirmed by recent developments in the church? In his paper entitled, The Wedding Band, Ellen G. White, and the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Roger Coon, associate secretary of the White Estates, gives this startling picture of the leavening influence of the wedding ring:

　　"It has, indeed and in fact, opened the door to jewelry generally...and it has paved the way for the tacit acceptance of other rings (engagement rings, class rings, friendship rings, etc.) on the hands of Seventh-day Adventist church members. With the lessening of opposition to the wearing of the wedding band on the campuses of some of our colleges in North America in the early 1970s, we find a more complex problem with jewelry in the early and mid-1980s." (p. 16).

　　It is appropriate to ask why the relaxed attitude toward the wedding ring has led to the wearing of other jewelry. The answer has been spelled out very clearly in the General Conference officers' statement which was adopted by the 1986 Autumn Council. In that action they referred to "the apparent consensus among Seventh-day Adventists in North America and our historic position here which makes little or no distinction between the wedding band and jewelry that is worn strictly for ornamental purposes."

　　Since our members see no difference between a ring on the third finger or any other finger, it is not hard to understand why they are becoming defensive of other jewelry as the wedding ring becomes more common place. Roger Coon's description of the "tacit acceptance of other rings" is only a shadow of what will happen as the custom becomes more widespread in our church.

　　In May, 1987, a survey was made of undergraduate students at a Seventh-day Adventist university relating to the wearing of rings. Out of two hundred and eleven students who responded to the survey, seventy-four percent said they could see no difference between a wedding ring and an engagement ring. Over half the men students stated that they planned to give an engagement ring to their future wives, and seventy-eight percent of the females felt that if a wedding ring was acceptable, then they could wear an engagement ring as well.

　　Should these alarming figures give us serious second thoughts about the wisdom of setting up man-made distinctions which the Word of God does not do?

　　Because the wearing of the wedding ring opens the door to other symbolic jewelry and eventually to ornaments in general, we should begin looking at that custom in a new light. We must appraise it, not only by its inherent merits or demerits, but by the effect it will have upon others. Some see no sin issue at all in wearing the ring. Does the Bible have anything to say about acts I which may not be sinful in themselves, but which could be a stumbling block to lead others into sin? Can we become accountable for the sins of someone else under such circumstances?

　　Every Seventh-day Adventist should consider the solemn answer to those questions. Paul wrote: "But when ye sin so against the brethren and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ." 1 Corinthians 8:12.

　　What sin was he referring to? What had those Corinthian believers done to wound a weak conscience and to become guilty of sin against Christ? They had eaten food offered to idols. Was that a sin in itself? No, Paul pronounced that it was not wrong, and they had the liberty to eat it. THEN WHY DOES HE CALL IT A SIN? Read the chapter and you will find that Paul called it a sin because the eating of that food was influencing others to eat it also, contrary to their conscientious convictions.

　　DON'T MISS THIS PROFOUND PRINCIPLE! If it is a sin to influence someone, by your example, to commit an act which is not sinful in itself, it is certainly more of a sin to influence them by your example to do something which is a clear violation of revealed truth. When people use your wedding ring as an excuse to put on other jewelry, because their weak conscience is overwhelmed by your example, the Word of God declares that you are sinning against Christ!

　　Paul was so deeply impressed by the seriousness of this issue that he came to a conclusion which many consider almost radical: "Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." I Corinthians 8:13.

　　In other words, he would run no risk of sharing the responsibility for another person's sin. He would simply eliminate forever even that innocent act which could be a stumbling block to that individual.

　　The General Conference officers have stated the matter correctly. Our people do not recognize a difference between the wedding band and other jewelry. Their conscientious convictions are based upon almost a century and a half of biblical and Spirit of Prophecy teaching. Who now would want to influence those people to violate their consciences either by precept or example? To do so is designated as sin by the inspired apostle.

　　Who, like Paul, would be willing to declare, "If a wedding ring make my brother to offend, I will wear no wedding ring while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend"?

　　Ellen White used the word "leavening" quite often in describing the effect of sin on the church. The dictionary defines it this way: "Any influence spreading through something and working on it to bring about a gradual change."

　　With that definition in mind, we can better understand this statement:

　　"I feel deeply over this leavening process which seems to be going on in the conformity to custom and fashion. Not one penny should be spent for a circlet of gold to testify that we are married." Testimonies to Ministers, p. 181.

　　Do you not see how we were warned that the introduction of the wedding ring would "bring about a, gradual change," as Webster put it? Sister White was not talking about the economy issue when she said not a penny should be spent for a wedding ring. She was talking about the more serious issue of opening a door, and starting a fermentation process which would penetrate and change the whole church.

　　Has it done that very thing? We have just presented proof that the prophetess had good reason to "feel deeply" over this small, but powerful, leaven which would have such far-reaching influence. When she said, "not one penny should be spent" for a wedding ring, it was just an emphatic way of saying that no one should wear one. She was troubled because of what that little deviation would lead to and how it would become a bad influence upon others. We should be even more concerned as we see how it is breaking down the conscientious convictions against jewelry which we ourselves have built up during all our past years of faithful preaching.

　　As late as 1977, Elder Neal Wilson, president of the General Conference, expressed convictions about the "leavening" statement on the wedding ring, and how it applied to the United States. At the North American Evangelistic Council of January 7, 1977, he clearly enunciated that the wearing of the ring was not imperative in this country. "There is a rumor that is circulating around, that the church leadership has sold out on thee wedding ring. This is a very incorrect, unfortunate statement. Some people insist that wedding rings are as necessary here in America as overseas. This is debatable. We appeal to our workers, we urge our people to follow the counsel of Ellen G. White found in Testimonies to Ministers, p. 180. We discourage the wedding ring in North America. It is not imperative. Press the claims of the gospel upon the candidates." (White Estates File Document.)

　　Elder Wilson was concerned that our members not receive the impression that "church leadership has sold out on the wedding ring." He, like the Review and Herald editor quoted earlier, understood the inspired counsel of God against wearing the ring and urged our workers and our members "to follow the counsel of Ellen G. White found in Testimonies to Ministers, p. 180." That is the statement, by the way, which declares that "not one penny should be spent for a circlet of gold to testify that we are married." (Ibid. p. 181.)

　　Five years earlier, another president of the General Conference, Elder Robert Pierson, had used that same statement about the wedding ring as the basis for an impassioned appeal in the Review and Herald for a revival and reformation. In his heart-to-heart talk entitled, This Leavening Process, he wrote:

　　"When I see the extreme fashions, the rings, the necklaces, the large brooches, the lockets, the highly ornamental watches, and the elaborate men's jewelry more and more apparent among us, it is not the precious stones that cause me most concern: it is that 'leavening process'-that pride, that love of self, the love of the world, that compromise-that these objects reveal, that makes me anxious for God's people ... too many of us are heading back into the world. If the love of the world is in our hearts the love of the Father just can't be there too." Review and Herald, December 17, 1972.

　　Obviously, we have come to a time when the "old landmarks of truth, experience and duty" need to be reaffirmed and strengthened. Sister White indicated that "we are to stand firmly in defense of our principles, in full view of the world."