The moral decay fallacy

gb93433 · Nov 15, 2003

I would disagree that it is getting harder and harder to take a stand for truth. I do believe that when we do we may experience some consequences that we may not like. I have seen that as pastor in a church.

My daughter has been a straight "A" student for nine years in public school. There have been times where she has taken a stance for truth. She has learned to repsect the other person and take a stance. That is good for a person to learn to do. I don't think we have come close to the Corinthian church in our churches yet. We do not have prostitutes in our worship services that I know of.

I wonder how many can say now that democracy is biblical? I have heard Baptists for years say that a democratic form of government is biblical in the church. It is only godly when the majority are godly. Like we see now, the ungodly can use a democracy to further their agenda against godliness and in accordance with what is right in their own eyes.

gb93433 · Nov 15, 2003

I would disagree that it is getting harder and harder to take a stand for truth. I do believe that when we do we may experience some consequences that we may not like. I have seen that as pastor in a church.

My daughter has been a straight "A" student for nine years in public school. There have been times where she has taken a stance for truth. She has learned to repsect the other person and take a stance. That is good for a person to learn to do. I don't think we have come close to the Corinthian church in our churches yet. We do not have prostitutes in our worship services that I know of.

I wonder how many can say now that democracy is biblical? I have heard Baptists for years say that a democratic form of government is biblical in the church. It is only godly when the majority are godly. Like we see now, the ungodly can use a democracy to further their agenda against godliness and in accordance with what is right in their own eyes.

Mark Osgatharp · Nov 15, 2003

Originally posted by Brett:
So, do you think that morality in the present-day society is actually declining? If so, what evidence is there to back such a statement up?

The difference we see in our generation is not so much more immorality as a different attitude toward immorality.

For example, Evans History of the Early English Baptists quotes an author from the 17th century who asserted that there was scarcely an Anglican Bishop who wasn't a sodomite or a whoremonger. However, as far as I have ever read, no one in those days tried to argue that these things were not sins.

The difference today is that people are saying that sodomy is not a sin at all - such as tje recent ordination of an openly sodomite bishop in the Episcopal church. The difference is that people are living together unmarried without shame, whereas in former days it was understood that fornication was immoral, even by those who practiced it.

I think this attitude of justifying immoral behavior is one reason there are so few conversions in this generation. People are simply not ashamed of their sins and therefore feel no need for repentance or salvation.

Mark Osgatharp

bryan1276 · Nov 15, 2003

Yes. Its obvious that moral decay is a fallacy and things are getting better and better. Maybe the monkey man Psychologist has evolution on the brain. The Bible is clear on the matter that times get worse. 2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
(KJV) The Bible is clear that man does not make progress, he goes backward. 2 Tim 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. (KJV) The Bible is clear that things get worse. 2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;(KJV)

Obviously the world is getting better so that God can burn it up. 2 Pet 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. (KJV)

Jude 1:14-15 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (KJV)

Pennsylvania Jim · Nov 15, 2003

Hold on a minute.

If we're talking about a trend, we have to define the boundaries, else we are in an "apples and oranges" situation.

Of course you can find a date in history when things were worse than now, and use it as evidence that "things are getting better". If the question is "were things ever worse", then that's ok.

But I interpreted the issue to be a question as to whether we, today, in 2003, in the US, are in an improving or declining moral trend. So, again, a definition is needed: do you mean over the last year, 10 years, 50 years, 200 years...which?

Interestingly, and predictably, I think most here have measured it from their earliest awareness of moral climate.

Younger folks, I'd bet, would not see the deterioration that older folks would see.

So...it depends on the parameters, which will have to be defined if we are to come to any conclusion.

Aaron · Nov 16, 2003

Originally posted by Brett:
I thought about Timothy when I made my original post, but I think that verse is saying that individual evil people will grow more and more sinful; that is, the wicked will get more and more wicked. I don't think it's referring to society as a whole. If you look at the surrounding verses, I think it's clear it's talking about people individually:

It doesn't sound like you've thought too hard about it, or you would see that you are not saying anything different than those you accuse of belching subterfuge and myth.

If I build a house out of rotten lumber, the whole house is corrupt. If individuals are growing worse, then the whole society is corrupt.

Tim · Nov 16, 2003

I don't think anyone here is saying that things are constantly getting better and better. What we are saying is that history shows a series of cycles in different regions of the world since the God introduced the church into the world.

Let's take the two Koreas as an example. Since the split, the North has continued to decline under the influence of wicked men. In the South, Christianity has taken hold. Now S. Korea sends out many missionaries. One is worse, the other is better than 50 years ago.

If we're going to keep citing 2 Timothy as proof that there has been a consistent moral decay in the world since the introduction of the church--then the church has been nothing but a massive failure. Is Christianity then a bad influence?

In Christ,

Tim

latterrain77 · Nov 16, 2003

There is a litany of horrific sins recorded in ancient and Biblical times. For example, consider the grotesque sins found in Judges 20: 6, 2 Kings 16: 3, etc. These sins (practiced in ancient times) are beyond gory even to our modern hearing. In addition, the Bible shows that "sin is sin" and equally weighted in result (James 2: 10). There is no "venial" sin (as some suggest) as ANY sin will make us guilty of ALL other sin according to James 2: 10.

What is different today is that sin is now more widely published (newspapers, television, talk radio, cable, internet, etc). As a result, it only appears that sin has increased because we hear more about it. The severity and depth of mankind's wickedness has been in place since the fall in Eden (Jer. 17: 9). So wicked was mankind's heart in the ancient times of Jeremiah that it was said to be desperately wicked and "unfathomable" (i.e. who can know it?) latterrain77

Tim · Nov 16, 2003

Originally posted by Aaron:

If I build a house out of rotten lumber, the whole house is corrupt. If individuals are growing worse, then the whole society is corrupt.

Click to expand...

Do you mean to say that Christians have no influence upon society or that Christians are also getting worse and worse?

Artimaeus · Nov 16, 2003

Originally posted by Helen:
This is new, folks. This is definitely new.

Matt 24:37 And as were the days of Noah, so shall be the coming of the Son of man.

Jesus didn't just pick at date at random. He was referring to a time of near universal rejection of God. There has been lying since the first generation, murder since the second, and prostitution isn't called the second (or is it first) oldest profession for nothing. There have always been pockets of rebellion (Sodom) and even worldwide (Noah's time) and Jesus identified the time of His return as one of universal rejection of Godliness like Noah's. We can argue about our local high schools, communities, and regions, but, to not be able to see a worldwide lessening of concern for the morality which is contrary to Biblical principles seems to be a "burying your head in the sand" mentality.

Tim · Nov 16, 2003

So did the "last days" begin in 1960, in America?

Aaron · Nov 16, 2003

If you're talking about a "History of the World" approach, then you're not telling the whole story.

The trends that isolated civilizations have followed (without fail) from, for all practical purposes, a moral and lawful beginning, which was the reason for their greatness, toward a decadent decline, which was the reason for their demise, are merely microcosms. The whole world will follow the same basic pattern until its destruction. God's wrath is revealed from heaven against ungodliness and wickedness.

The world reached that point not long after Adam in the days of Noah. The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually....the earth was corrupt in God's sight, and the earth was filled with violence..

God's response was to destroy the world. The confusion of languages at the Tower of Babel had the effect of preventing the population as a whole from getting to that point so soon. Now, instead of the total population of the world decaying all at once, it happens in cycles and in isolated pockets. However, with the advent of modern communication technology, we are now on a fast pace toward a global society.

Consider what God said to Abraham. Though He promised to give Abraham a certain land, the original inhabitants still had rights to it. Why? Despite their idolatry and superstition their iniquity was not yet full, Gen. 15:16.

Consider Christ's words regarding the last days. because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. Matt. 24:12.

You can dispute statistics and personal observations all you want. You can't dispute the testimony of the Holy Spirit.

There is a moral decay which will, someday, bring God's destruction once again upon the whole world as in the days of Noe, but perhaps sooner for a particular nation.

[Edit: I started this reply long ago. I'm at work and can only contribute in short intervals. This is in reply to one of Tim's assertions on page two. Glad to see others with the same views.]

Brett · Nov 16, 2003

Originally posted by Aaron:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Brett:
[qb] I thought about Timothy when I made my original post, but I think that verse is saying that individual evil people will grow more and more sinful; that is, the wicked will get more and more wicked. I don't think it's referring to society as a whole. If you look at the surrounding verses, I think it's clear it's talking about people individually:

It doesn't sound like you've thought too hard about it</font>[/QUOTE]Nothing like deliberate condescension to start out your day.

, or you would see that you are not saying anything different than those you accuse of belching subterfuge and myth.

If I build a house out of rotten lumber, the whole house is corrupt. If individuals are growing worse, then the whole society is corrupt.

It's saying that the wicked are growing worse, and by wicked it means unrepentant unbelievers. By your logic, since society as a whole is inevitably going down the tubes, then there's no point in us Christians trying to better either outselves or our world.

"If individuals are growing worse, then the whole society is corrupt?" - well, that's true, but individuals only live so long, and we're talking about the morality of many, many societies here - societies that existed since the beginning of civilization, theoretically. As Tim stated, there have been many instances of increasing and decreasing morality in history. Clearly, there is no general trend toward moral decay.

Regarding your second post, Aaron, again, all the verses you quoted state that man is continually sinful and will always be wicked. No comment is made regarding trends in sinfulness.

Originally posted by Bryan: Yes. Its obvious that moral decay is a fallacy and things are getting better and better. Maybe the monkey man Psychologist has evolution on the brain. The Bible is clear on the matter that times get worse.

1. Nobody said things are getting better and better. Strawman.

2. "Monkey man psychologist (it's a woman, BTW) has evolution on the brain" ... What?

3. All the bible verses you quoted have nothing to say about society declining; they simply say that God will (rightfully) judge the wicked when the time comes.

Aaron · Nov 16, 2003

Originally posted by Brett:
By your logic, since society as a whole is inevitably going down the tubes, then there's no point in us Christians trying to better either outselves or our world.

The end times will begin with a great apostasy. The salt will lose its savor, so to speak. The Beast will be given power to make war with the saints and to overcome them.

These are things that have been prophesied and will come to pass. And you want to say that removes any motivation to "better ourselves or the world?" That would be true if the motivation for obedience lay in the pragmatic benefits thereof. But the testimony of Scripture is that a Christian's motivation to obey is in a love for God born in him by the Holy Ghost. It is not in some hope for an easy, peaceful existence.

As far as this-worldly benefits go, Christianity is most disadvantageous. We of all men would be most miserable.

It's saying that the wicked are growing worse, and by wicked it means unrepentant unbelievers.

Regarding your second post, Aaron, again, all the verses you quoted state that man is continually sinful and will always be wicked. No comment is made regarding trends in sinfulness.

You're joking, right? You seriously think that the phrase "Iniquity shall abound," really means "Iniquity will stay the same,"?

But let's say that you're right in your interpretations. How, exactly, will the wicked get worse?

Brett · Nov 16, 2003

You're joking, right? You seriously think that the phrase "Iniquity shall abound," really means "Iniquity will stay the same,"?

Abound also means to be in great abundance.

And the wicked will grow more wicked because they will continue to sin more and more, and will move farther and farther away from God. We see this in everyday life all the time.

Tim · Nov 16, 2003

According to Hebrews, the "last days" had already begun when the letter was written. For the writer refers to them as "these last days" during which God revealed himself through the Son (Heb. 1:2).

So if we compare that to Paul's warnings in 2 Tim 3 (v.1 & following), while considering that this was clearly a personal admonition to Timothy (v.14,15), the only logical conclusion is that Timothy would face the perils of those "evil men and seducers" (V.13) himself.

Paul was not talking about the span of modern history getting worse and worse, rather he was warning Timothy specifically of the kind of dangers he would have to face at the hands of evil men--his contemporaries, who were getting worse all the time.

No other scriptures cited say anything about a consistent pattern of moral decay throughout history either. I think that is the crux of the matter. It is merely a popular theory. Many of us believe it is inconsistent with other scriptures and is not born out by any extensive study of history.

In Christ,

Tim

Dr. Bob · Nov 16, 2003

Thought: The phrase "last days" obvious can mean the general era AFTER (hence, later or last) the time of Christ. It also has a very specific meaning, dealing with the time JUST PRIOR to the return of Christ for His kingdom.

This dual meaning of a word/phrase lends itself to misunderstanding and takes astute biblical study to be sure of WHICH of the meanings is appropriate each time the phrase in used.

And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

And I will show wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: and it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

In such a case we ARE (since Peter and Paul) are in the "last days" generally speaking. But are we in the "last days" as specifically described by Peter (Acts 2 above) or Paul (I Tim 4)? I think not.

Although the moon looked really like blood during the eclipse last week . .

Jailminister · Nov 17, 2003

I am not sure that Crime stats have that much to do with moral decay. Over the years economics has been a big factor in crime. See this chart for that inference:
Click Here

Moral decay has to do with acceptance of sin as normal or at least is ok. This day is a repeat of what has happened in the past(as in the days of Noah). Does that justify the reality of that today's moral have gotten worst than they were pre 1960. NO. Education is not the answer to our problems, as your professor said. The answer is a lack of FEAR OF GOD and NOT following His commandments.

Brett · Nov 17, 2003

Jailminister, I wholeheartedly agree. I think my professor was arguing strictly from the point of view of crime, and not necessarily sin (as you know, they're often not the same, although sometimes they are). Education definitely does decrease crime; but that may be just because those in higher economic brackets are more educated.

But yeah, the root cause is definitely the fact that we do not follow God's commandments closely enough, and too often take them for granted. But again, I don't think that we necessarily do that more than at any other point in history, and I have yet to see prooft that we do.

Jailminister · Nov 17, 2003

Brett, here is a little something that you may want to know.

Over the past 30 years (it was reported in 1993 in "Index of Leading Cultural Indicators" by the Heritage Foundation) our population has increased 41%, but our Gross Domestic Product has tripled, and our social spending has had the benefit of a 500% increase, impressive by any standards. And yet, we have had a 500% increase in violent crime, a 400% increase in illegitimate birth, a 400% increase in the divorce rate, a 300% increase in single parent homes, a 200% increase in teenage suicides, and a 75 point decrease in SAT scores.

Each day in America there are 2,795 teen pregnancies and 4,219 teenagers who contract sexually transmitted diseases. Every 64 seconds a baby is born to a teenage mother; five minutes later, a baby will have been born to a teenager who already has a child. Ten hours later, 560 babies will have been born to teenagers. Every day there are 106 teen abortions alone! ….from "Twilight's Last Gleaming? By Chuck Missler

The moral decay fallacy

Active Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Administrator

New Member

New Member

New Member