Tag Archives: moral

Christians Cave to a Confused, Corrupt Culture! Don Boys, Ph.D.




The early Christian churches captured and transformed the Roman Empire with the Gospel! Famous historian Will Durant wrote, “Caesar and Christ had met in the arena and Christ had won.” That would not be an accurate statement of contemporary Christianity in view of the major mischief of the U.S. Supreme Court recently, the Congress, and the President. It appears that Churches have lost their power, Christians have lost their purity, and the culture is in the pits. Christians have caved to the confused, corrupt culture and the reason is massive pulpit failure.


Many loosey-goosey preachers teach that Christians should be deeply involved with the culture: sing all the popular songs, attend all the vile Hollywood movies, watch the most popular television shows, wear the newest clothes (however seductive, ugly, and revealing they may be), and be able to “jive” with the most ungodly people even if normal listeners have no comprehension of what is said.


However, that is not the way it is supposed to be.  Christians are not to be moved by the culture; they are to move the culture. That is not happening today. Professing Christians, even members of Bible-preaching churches, are among the most worldly, weird, even wicked people in town! Most show no shame at their ungodly life and even defend it!


The prophet asked in Jeremiah 6:15, “Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush.” As years have passed, I have been surprised then shocked and stunned  at what I have observed in good churches: the general worldly attitude, the aping of the world’s dress standards, the use of four letter words, the loose handling of the opposite sex even in public. I wonder if parents have tried to instill in their children any kind of character. When reproved, they usually are offended and hardly ever are ashamed. Is shame passé like guilt, gratitude, and grace?


Those who declare that “It’s always been this way” are wrong. While there have always been some people without character, it has not been general until recent years. Early Christians influenced society by treating slaves, children, and women compassionately. Christians picked up abandoned babies left on the street to die and raised them as their own even when it was illegal to do so! Christ placed women on a high pedestal and Paul continued to move the culture of his day. The early Christians “turned the world upside down!” Pagan religions had the Empire by the throat and Christians broke that hold and destroyed the pagan religions with the truth. Christ’s birth even designates the date.


Christ established the Good Samaritan ethic to sacrifice so as to help others who were suffering. He also told us to treat others the way we want to be treated. He taught His followers to be gracious and generous to the less fortunate. Moreover, He taught us to pray for our enemies and do good to those who despitefully use us. Such teachings changed the culture and set the tone for two thousand years. The emphasis on doing one’s best, striving for success, developed into the university system of the Middle Ages; and the major left leaning, anti-Christian, socialist, anything-goes American universities were begun by the sacrificial giving of Bible believing Christians. Such institutions today are without shame, spirituality, and little scholarship.


High standards of justice going back to the Old Testament and continuing into the New were unknown in Egypt, Ur,

Nineveh, Greece, and Rome. Our world has been influenced far more by Jerusalem than Rome or Athens. But today the influence is Hollywood, New York, and Paris. Few Christians choose to be numbered as a “peculiar” people so they are just odd instead.


Jim Daly of Focus on the Family told the media it would be “foolhardy not to recognize that the culture is moving more” in the direction of support for same-sex marriage. He also signaled a willingness to work with abortion-rights groups to find common ground on adoption.  Such is the successor of Dr. James Dodson who was forced out of Focus for being too confrontational with the culture. Daly doesn’t understand that Christians are supposed to challenge, confront, and change the culture!
Recently the head of Exodus International apologized for his stand against homosexuality and their attempt to help sodomites become normal, decent people. He and his board closed down their work and faded into the corrupt culture. One reason given for the shutdown is that the culture is changing. Sure it is because of people like him who have no anchor and no chart to guide them.
Most Christians are mental zombies gorging junk food in front of a television set. Seeking liberty, such carnal Christians bounce from liberty to license to licentiousness.


H. L. Hastings, in 1844, visited the Fiji Islands and was shocked to find that a human could be bought for $7.00 (or a musket), less than the price of a cow! Moreover, the purchased human could be beaten, worked to death then eaten. Then, the Gospel came to the islands and about 1200 churches were established and no human could be bought for any price. The true Gospel changes the culture.


During World War II, on a remote Pacific island, an American soldier met an English-speaking native carrying a Bible. The G.I. pointed to the Bible and sneered, “We educated people don’t put much faith in that Book anymore.” The islander grinned, patted his own belly saying, “Well, it’s a good thing for you that we do, or else you’d be in here by now.” Christ changes the culture but modern Christians have been moved by the culture into a corrupt, cowardly, compromising life.


Christians should not only be right when the world is right but be right when the world is wrong.
We don’t want or need a church that moves with the world but a church that moves the world. There is movement today but movement is not always progress. All movement seems to be in the wrong direction.  At least, in the USA.


(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives, author of 15 books, frequent guest on television and radio talk shows, and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. His shocking book, ISLAM: America’s Trojan Horse!; Christian Resistance: An Idea Whose Time Has Come–Again!; and The God Haters are all

available at Amazon.com. These columns go to newspapers, magazines, television, and radio stations and may be used without change from title through the end tag. His web sites are www.cstnews.com and www.Muslimfact.com and www.thegodhaters.com. Contact Don for an interview or talk show.)


Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.




Filed under Commentary



The Kind of Christian I Am!
“The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision.” Psalm 2:2-4
Twenty-first century America is a land of self-exaltation. To many folks, laws, rules, guidelines reek with negative denotations. They cramp the individual style, and the most important thing to them is doing or being whatever one wants. So, one by one rules and guidelines are discarded and laws are changed to eliminate guilt. Wrong doing is made justifiable and acceptable to the majority by making it legal. The Judeo-Christian ethic and morality that made this country a great nation is being summarily discarded in favor of personal desires long recognized as immoral.
Enter the debate on morality. What is moral? Is it not the high standard of living, and judgments given to us in the Holy Word? But morality has become a negative to a godless generation. The same generation does not want to be classified as immoral either. So, is there a middle ground? That mindset employs a different term heard in public educational institutions and in other places as well. It is “amoral.” Codes of life; identification of what is good and evil; separation of sexes, etc., are all addressed in what is perceived to be the neutral ground of amorality. But does that vacuum exist? May civilization exist without clear guidelines of right and wrong?
By word definition, the prefix “a” is a negative as is the prefix “im.” Thus, the definition of “amoral” is “not moral.” The definition of “immoral” is “not moral.” They mean the same thing. “Amoral” is just another way of saying “immoral.” There is no moral vacuum! There is no middle ground!
Still, the world persists in the madness of depraved human nature. It is an indicator of the last days of the age. This is not happening in America alone, but is a worldwide ecumenical movement to exalt sinful humanity as indicated in the prophetic second Psalm. The few times it is mentioned in the Bible that God laughs, is in the same condemnatory context as Psalm 2:2-4. One day the “amorality” of the world will give way to screams for rocks and mountains to fall on them to hide them from the face of Him Who is coming. So, cut it clean! It is either moral or it is immoral! That is the kind of Christian I am!



1 Comment

Filed under Commentary



This is an article clipped from the Rock Island Argus dated 4-18-10. The author is John Donald O’shea, a retired judge. I must commend the Judge for his insight and going on record with what he believes.

I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy.” – Hippocratic Oath, “Classical” version.

The purpose of this article is to make a comparison. It is to question our moral values. It is not to condone or make light of cruelty to animals.

Consider two cases. The first is that of “Dutch” the cat. The second reached the Supreme Court.

Case No. 1

The Dispatch and The Rock Island Argus reported on the first case: “The plight of a cat found beaten and nailed to a utility pole on April 5, 2010 in Henry County raises the question, ‘Who would do such a thing? …

“Dutch’s story has sparked national attention, including a story in USA Today and phone calls from Florida and Georgia to the animal control officer who transported Dutch. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animal (PETA) also is offering up to $2,500 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person or people responsible.”

Dr. Carl Vincent, a doctor of psychology with South Park Psychology in Moline commented on Dutch’s case: “Acts of animal cruelty, among other destructive behaviors, are common in the backgrounds of certain criminals and ‘typical to serial killers that we have studied in society.’

“A person who would commit such an act would have to have the complete absence of remorse. There’s no internal monologue, no moral compass inside their head. They nailed that screaming cat to a tree; it was funny” to them. It was perhaps accompanied by a though process such as,” ‘I don’t like cats. Never did. But I got this one.’”

He added that if the perpetrator is an older child, adolescent or adult, he or she likely would be antisocial or sociopathic.

A younger child likely would have a conduct disorder. Such people can’t conduct themselves within the boundaries of social norms or within the boundaries of what’s expected.

As they age, he added, they have “that type of detached ability to inflict pain without any real remorse.”

While most people “naturally feel sorry for hurting other people,” he said, sociopathic people or those with a conduct disorder will often tell you, “I don’t care,” “I don’t mind,” “I’ve seen that.”

“It’s quite chilling,” the doctor said. “It actually registers as quite alien to us,” because “we’re emotional creatures.”

Dutch has since died.

Case No. 2

On April 18, 2007, the U>S. Supreme Court decided the case of Gonzales v. Carhart, and upheld the Congressional Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003.

In discussing what was involved, the Court stated “(1) The Act does not regulate the most common abortion procedures used in the first trimester of pregnancy, when the vast majority of abortions take place.

“(2) In the usual second-trimester procedure, “dilation and evacuation” (D&E), the doctor dilates the cervix and vagina. The fetus is usually ripped apart as it is removed, and the doctor may take 10 to 15 passes to remove it in its entirety.

“(3) The procedure that prompted the federal Act and various state statutes, including Nebraska’s, is a variation of the standard D&E, and is herein referred to as “intact D&E.” The main difference between the two procedures is that in intact D&E a doctor extracts the fetus intact or largely intact with only a few passes, pulling out its entire body instead of ripping it apart. In order to allow the head to pass through the cervix, the doctor typically pierces or crushes the skull. In the days when I was hearing criminal cases, I always believed that criminals who were guilty of wanton cruelty deserved the harshest sentences. I was appalled when one defendant went on a horse killing spree in Henry County, and more so when a child was wantonly murdered in the old incinerator building in Rock Island.

I am appalled by what happened to this cat, but I find consolation in the fact that the press and public are also revolted by this cruelty. But where is the concern for all those viable fetuses aborted under the second or third procedures described above?

Why aren’t all the people who are revolted by what happened to this cat repelled to an even greater extent when a doctor makes “10 or 15 passes” to rip a tiny human being apart to “remove it in its entirety?’

Why isn’t everyone outraged when a doctor brings the head of a viable child through the mother’s cervix and then “typically pierces or crushes the child’s skull? Is it worse” to nail a cat to a pole, or to crush the head of a tiny baby – one that is capable of independent life outside its mother’s womb?

Is a cat called “Dutch” more important than an unnamed fetus?

Could a reasonable person apply all or any part of Dr. Vincent’s remarks to doctors who routinely abort viable babies, using the second and third abortion procedures described above? Is it more immoral for a sadist to crucify a cat than for a mother to allow her child to be shredded – ripped to pieces, or to authorize her medical agent to destroy her child by stabbing into the base of its skull, or by crushing its head, which “is made in the image and likeness of God?”

After Dred Scott, slavery in the territories had legal protection. Notwithstanding that, Abe Lincoln at Galesburg said “No one has a right to do a (moral) wrong.” Do you agree or disagree?

Leave a comment

Filed under Commentary