The word “mores” (pronounced morays) is defined as “customs that are considered conducive to the general welfare of society, and which, by observance develop the force of law, often becoming part of the legal code.”  We recognize these as generally accepted attitudes and practices that mark an orderly and moral society.  They are conventions that have, until recently, been expected as the norms for our behavior in a community, state or nation in the world.  There are variations in some of these conventions from one nation or culture to another, but many of them are the same in every culture.

One aspect of social mores is that they tend to change with the passing of time.  For example, in the 19th century it would have been scandalous for a woman to appear in public in a dress that revealed her ankles.  By the mid-20th century, however, women not only wore shorter skirts, but also lower cut tops, shorts, and tank-tops in public.  The same kind of changes also took place in other social mores, including the now infamous sexual revolution of the 1960s.

Whether we admit it or not, Christians are affected by social mores.  As society’s customs have changed over the years, Christians have followed along in varying degrees.  In some cases, the changes in our societal customs have little effect on our spiritual walk.  In other cases, however, these changes can raise significant issues for us.  As is the case with many circumstances in life, some Christians deride any changes, whether they affect our spiritual walk or not.  Others jump whole-heartedly into every change with little regard for the consequences.  Some, on the other hand, try to ignore the tensions produced by changing social mores as though ignoring them will make them go away.

A case in point is the changing societal attitude toward homosexuality.  The Attorney General of the United States recently declared that all U.S. courts  must grant the same status to same-sex partners that they would to a heterosexual married couple, whether the laws of their states recognize such unions or not.  This is an attempt to force the homosexual agenda on states against their will.  It is, in fact, unconstitutional, but few seem willing to press this point in our government.

For Christians, the push for so-called equality for homosexuals is a challenge to our faith.  God’s word is clear that those who practice homosexuality will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9, 10).  To say this does not mean that we hate homosexuals.  It simply upholds God’s will on this subject in the same way as observing that those who practice heterosexual immorality will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9, 10).  The Lord said that His word will judge at the last day (Jn. 12:48).  Therefore, as slaves of Christ we must abide by His word and warn everyone to do the same.

When legislators propose a law to require some kind of moral conduct we often hear critics say, “You can’t legislate morality.”  This is a cop-out offered by those who do not wish to be bound by any moral code.  In contrast to this, though, we must observe that one cannot legislate immorality.  As Christians we are bound to obey those who rule over us (Rom. 13:1ff).  However, as Christians we are also bound to an even higher authority.  If our government decrees that evil is good, we cannot obey it.  We cannot change our attitude about sin simply because society decides to condone it.  Like the apostles, we must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29).

Sometimes words or phrases from one language are adopted into the common usage of another language.  Often the adoption of such words or phrases occurs simply because the foreign terms are a more direct means of communicating a particular idea.  For example, the initials RSVP, that we often use when inviting friends to an important event, come from the French phrase which means “respond, if you please.”  Another phrase that has come into common use in English is the Latin term, mea culpa.  In the Latin it literally means “through my fault” and it is used when one is admitting his guilt in some matter.

Most of us are unlikely to use this phrase, unless we’re trying to impress someone, or if we’re having some fun with one another.  We have, however, heard it used, most often in the context of a news story about a prominent person who has been caught in some indiscretion.  Many times in such cases, the person involved will face the media in a public show of remorse over his actions.  A person in this situation will often admit to his or her wrongdoing, and will ask for the forgiveness of family, friends, teammates or constituents.

In the scriptures, the principle of admitting one’s wrongdoing is a fundamental element in how God expects us to conduct ourselves.  Both Old and New Testaments contain stories of individuals who were caught in some sin and were called upon to admit their guilt.  In each case we see that forgiveness of the particular sin is dependent upon one’s willingness to admit his sin.  This just makes sense because one will not repent of a sin that he is unwilling to admit he has committed.

Two Old Testament examples illustrate this truth.  In 1 Sam. 15 King Saul of Israel sinned against God by failing to utterly destroy the nation of Amalek as God had commanded.  Instead of killing every living thing in that nation, Saul and the people spared the king and the best of the flocks and herds.  When confronted by the prophet Samuel, Saul claimed that the animals had been spared to make sacrifices to God.  Finally Saul admitted his sin vs. 24 & 30; however, it is clear in these verses that Saul’s primary concern was looking good before the people.  Saul was not penitent, even though he offered a mea culpa to Samuel.  The proof in the pudding is that Saul continued to disobey God thereafter.

In 2 Sam. 24 King David of Israel sinned against God by ordering a census of the people.  When God brought pestilence against the nation because of David’s sin, David cried out to God, “Behold, it is I who have sinned, and it is I who have done wrong; but these sheep, what have they done?  Please let Your hand be against me and against my father’s house” (2 Sam. 24:17).  David was truly sorry for his sin and he openly admitted it to God with a sincerity that cannot be questioned.  The proof in this case is that David went on obeying God and is called a man after God’s own heart.

The lesson for us is that God still requires a mea culpa from each of us when we sin.  In 1 Jn. 1:8, 9 John says, “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.  If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”  The beginning point for forgiveness is to admit one’s sins.  Then, in godly sorrow, we must ask the Lord to forgive us for those sins.  His gracious promise to His people is that the blood of Jesus His Son continues to cleanse us from all sin.  May we always have tender hearts that say, “Mea Culpa,” to God and that ask Him to forgive our sins.

One of the most basic principles of propaganda is called “The Big Lie.”  The origin of this principle has been variously attributed to such men as Adolf Hitler and his propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels.  It appears in Hitler’s book, Mein Kampf, and is one of the features of the government of “Big Brother” in George Orwell’s book, 1984.  The principle has been stated in various ways, two of which are:  “If you tell a big enough lie and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”  And, “If you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes truth.”

“The Big Lie” has found a place in virtually every aspect of modern society.  Politicians are masters of this principle, often repeating outrageous statements, either of the success of their policies, or deriding the character or policies of an opponent.  Environmentalists have also used this principle to convince an entire generation of people that man-made global warming (now called climate change) is destroying the planet.  So, also, have proponents of gay marriage and the homosexual agenda used this principle to advance their ideas.

It is important to understand that those who use “The Big Lie” in order to advance their agendas know they are telling a lie.  The fact that their statements or policies are lies is not the issue for them.  The issue is winning approval of their position and gaining power as a result of it.  Hitler and Goebbels understood this and used it to perfection in Nazi Germany, but they were rank amateurs in comparison to their modern counterparts.

The power of “The Big Lie” is such that it blinds us to the truth.  Jesus spoke of this principle as He dealt with the religious leaders of the first century.  They taught things that were patently false, but had done so for so long that they were believed to be true.  In Mt. 15:14 Jesus called them blind guides and warned that if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.  Paul the apostle later warned that the time would come when people would be sent a “deluding influence” so they would believe a lie, because they did not love the truth so as to be saved (2 Th. 2:10-12).

The very idea that one would promote a lie for his own personal gain is abhorrent to any honest person.  Yet, from the time that Satan entered the Garden of Eden, God’s people have been subjected to one big lie after another.  Satan’s big lie to Eve was that eating the forbidden fruit would make her like God.  He knew this wasn’t true, but it advanced his purposes to tell the lie and to convince Eve to believe it.  The same thing continues today, with the potential for the same kind of consequences as Adam and Eve experienced.

This is why the scriptures exhort us to not allow the world to brainwash us into doing that which violates God’s word.  In Rom. 12:2 Paul said we are not to be conformed to the world, but to be transformed by the renewing of our minds.  In Jas. 1:27 James said that one aspect of pure religion is to keep oneself unstained by the world.  In Jas. 1:21, 22 James said we must receive the implanted word which is able to save our souls and to be doers of the word and not just hearers.

“The Big Lie” takes many forms today, urging us to discard the moral standards of scripture in favor of man’s standards.  The lie is being repeated in books, magazines, television, radio, the movies, the halls of Congress, and even from some pulpits in the land.  This influence is leading many to now believe a lie, instead of God’s truth.  Those who truly love God will rely on His word alone to mold their attitudes and actions in life.

The wickedness of today’s world is such that it ought to evoke comparisons to the ancient world that perished in the flood.  Of that time the scripture says, “Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Gen. 6:5).  If the world is not to this same point today, it has to be very close.

In that ancient time, God decided to cleanse the earth by means of a world-wide flood that swept away all those who were not in the Ark with Noah and his family.  During the time that Noah was preparing the Ark, the only answer to the judgment that was coming was to be in the Ark when the flood came.  Noah preached righteousness to those around him as he built the Ark in order to give them an opportunity to be saved from the flood.  Unfortunately, no one outside of his immediate family responded to his preaching.

Such a cleansing of the world is not going to happen again, for God promised Noah that He would never again send such a flood upon the earth (Gen. 9:11).  Instead, the earth is being reserved for fire that will utterly destroy it at the last day when the world will be judged (2 Pet. 3:7-10).  This judgment is just as certain as the flood was in Noah’s day, for our Lord compared His return for judgment to this historical event (Mt. 24:37-39).  He also warned, as Noah must have done concerning the flood, that no one knows when He will return again for this judgment (Mt. 24:36, 42).

Knowing that the world is such a wicked place, and that judgment is coming, where do we turn for an answer to this dilemma?  In Noah’s time, the Ark was the only answer to impending judgment.  Today, as it has been ever since the flood, the only answer to judgment is God’s word.  In Psa. 19:7-11 David said of God’s word, “The law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.  The precepts of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.  The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever; the judgments of the Lord are true; they are righteous altogether.  They are more desirable than gold; sweeter also than honey and the drippings of the honey comb.  Moreover, by them Your servant is warned; in keeping them there is great reward.”

In David’s view, the only hope for mankind is to devote itself to God’s word.  Everything about God’s word is for our benefit, and if we avail ourselves of its power, we will live well here in life and we will live with God in eternity.  This is God’s intent for us.  This is why He has revealed His will in the scriptures.  As David said, we are warned by His commandments and if we keep them we will receive a great reward (Psa. 19:11).

In order to avail ourselves of this power, and to avoid the judgment that is coming upon the wicked, we must devote ourselves to God’s word.  In Rom. 12:2 Paul said, “And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.”  In Jas. 1:21 James said, “Therefore, putting aside all filthiness and all that remains of wickedness, in humility receive the word implanted which is able to save your souls.”

Judgment is coming; of this we may be certain.  We may also be certain that when the Lord returns the wicked will not go unpunished, just as it was in the flood.  Therefore, the only answer to this impending judgment is to know God’s word and to obey it.

They are about three-eighths of an inch long.  They are about one-quarter of an inch wide at the narrowest point, and about seven-sixteenths of an inch wide at their widest point.  They would fit, with room to spare, on the average man’s thumb nail.  What are they?  They are the feet of an unborn child at ten weeks after conception.  There is no mistaking what they are, for they are clearly human feet, complete with ten tiny, yet perfectly formed, toes.

In 1970, Dr. Russell Sacco, who shared a lab with a pathologist who kept unborn babies in jars of formaldehyde on his shelf, was struck by the highly developed state of the tiniest of these unborn babies.  He took a picture with the feet of a 10-week old unborn baby held between his thumb and forefinger.  This picture, showing two tiny, but perfectly developed feet, each complete with toes and toe nails, powerfully demonstrated that unborn babies are indeed human, even at this very early state of gestation.

In 1974 Mrs. Virginia Evers used this picture in a March for Life on the first anniversary of the Roe V. Wade Supreme Court decision which legalized abortion on demand.  Using this photograph as a model, Mrs. Evers designed a lapel pin the exact size and shape of the a 10-week old unborn baby.  In 1979 a world-wide pro-life symposium in Dublin, Ireland designated these “Precious Feet” as the International Pro-Life Symbol.  Today, millions of these precious feet pins have been distributed world-wide.

These “precious feet” dramatize the fact that abortion destroys a human life, not an inhuman blob of protoplasm euphemistically called a “fetus.”  They also help dramatize the fact that human life is sacred, even in the womb, and should be protected.  It is important to note that the precious feet do not prove these truths.  They simply illustrate them.  With or without this symbol, however, God’s word declares the sanctity of human life.

We know that human life is precious to God because it is made in His image.  In Gen. 1:26 God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”  Later, in Gen. 9:6, God told Noah that whoever sheds man’s blood shall have his blood shed, because He had made man in His image.  This statement is one reason why capital punishment was authorized by God.  If someone murders another, he has destroyed a life made in God’s image and must therefore pay with his own life.

This provision of God’s will, which predates the Law of Moses, also applies to the unborn because God commanded in the Law of Moses that anyone who caused an unborn baby to die must pay with his own life (Ex. 21:22-25).  In addition to this, God inspired Solomon to write that He hates “hands that shed innocent blood” (Prov. 6:17).  Obviously “innocent blood” may refer to any person murdered by another, but it is also clear that there is no more innocent blood than the blood of unborn babies.  Therefore, we correctly understand that God hates those who murder the unborn by the barbaric practice of abortion.

Since 1973 more than 57 million “precious feet” have been murdered by abortionists in the United States alone.  The souls of these unborn have returned to the God who gave them, but God will not leave the guilty unpunished (Ex. 34:6-7).  All human life, even that of unborn babies, is made in God’s image.  Therefore, it is precious in His sight.  Let us pray that all “precious feet” will be allowed the opportunity to be born.

The Precious Feet pin above may be ordered from Heritage House, a supplier of pro-life materials, through their web site: http://www.hh76.org

Sanctity of Human Life Sunday is the third Sunday in January, which is the closest Sunday to the anniversary of the Roe V. Wade decision, that was handed down on January 22, 1973.  This year Sanctity of Human Life Sunday is January 19th.