A Voice in the

site navigation

free newsletter

January 18, 1998

[Return] to: "Q/A"

Q/A Topics:
Depravity of the 90's

"even so, come quickly, Lord Jesus!!! AMEN!!!!

Mmmm, what do I say..? It was rousing, earnest, and right on! It...made me think of the Jeremiah verses (1:18,19) ... Wow...

Your letters and articles are of great encouragement to my husband and myself and we are greatly blessed by them. But I feel that it was necessary to write you about your latest commentary on the 90's. It was a very good article and very factual. We got rid of our t.v. last year. Just another of the weedings that God has done in our life. We have also have come out of the established church. When we started home schooling our children it was at a time that God was really opening our eyes to things going on in the world and church and we started to say "Hey, what does God's word teach on that" and so started our journey. Anyway long story... But back to the article, Paul I know you are passionate with your beliefs in God's word BUT there was no need to call the girls sluts ( let no unwholesome word come out of your mouth...). We all know what they are and worse than that they are lost and that is by far their worse condition. Again, encouragement- keep up the good work and keep your eyes on Him.

Slut== "a woman considered sexually promiscuous..prostitute..slovenly" Synonyms == tart, tramp, hussy.

The definition in the "thesaurus" section from where the synonyms came =="A vulgar, promiscuous woman who flouts propriety."

Don't you think this aptly describes the Spices? They would all "blend right in" to any "working" street of any city.

The "tone" of the commentary was "meant to be" strong and, even, "shocking." And the word in question was specifically chosen as such.

Some time back I happened to turn on the TV and the Spices were featured on a talk show. People are deceived by their nice and "sweet" demeanor, and they are very "likeable" I'm sure. And typical naive ones would think, "Oh, what wonderful, nice girls they are! How charming." But, that's what satan does...he makes his evil look to be wonderfully sweet. But on the stage they are "sluts"

Yes...individually, they are lost. They need the Lord. And if I ever met any of them someplace, I would speak with them as I did the prostitute I worked next to at an electronics assembly job years ago. At the time, my unequal yoke had not yet left, and so we invited her to our home for a meal, too. After all, for their debauchery, they are "people" who need the Lord. And yes, when you get to know them, they have the same "hurts" as any other person who is not saved.

But on the stage, what they represent is the very essence of whoredom and depravity. I don't think you would find it at all possible to walk up to their stage during one of their acts and start speaking with them about the Lord, now, would you.

While they appear on talk shows presenting the "nice girl" image, in actuality they are the very representation of today's "cancer" of sin. And must be labelled as such. After all, God in the O.T. on numerous occasions called His wayward chosen nation of Israel, the adulterous "whore" she was. And as for "nice words" ...consider: John called the people of his day, "brood of vipers!"(Lk3:7) Jesus called the leaders, "Serpents, brood of vipers!"(Mt23:33) "Of your father, the devil" (Jn8:44) "evil and adulterous generation" (Mt12:39)

Sorry that the word was offensive. But then, sin is offensive to God.


An "adult" ?

Thought you would be interested in the following editorial from the Sept. DECISION magazine, written by Roger C. Palms, Editor.


Obviously I am not an adult. At least by common definition I'm not. I don't visit adult bookstores, I don't watch adult videos, I don't go to adult shows, I don't click on to adult Web sites. So I must not be an adult.

Yet, I read books that stretch my mind. I use the Web for research; I enjoy good comedy, good music and good mystery drama. But unfortunately I cannot be classified as an adult because I don't do "adult" things.

Scripture says, "Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable - if anything is excellent or praiseworthy - think about such things." And I believe that. But who in our culture would ever call that "adult"?

So what are young people encouraged to think? To be an adult is to be perverted. To be an adult is to act only on a base, animal level. But to be a human being with a mind that rises above and isn't swayed by the titillation of a sensate culture is to be what? A non-adult? A child? `

We've ruined a good word. At one time "adult" meant responsible, mature, wise. Certainly an adult was someone to look up to and to admire. An adult used to be a person who had grown up. Now an adult is a person who has dumbed-down all the way to the level of goats, rabbits, moles or slugs.

But people will argue that "adult" is a protection. It means "no children allowed." It means that the indecent is only for adults, evil is only for people of a certain age; the corrupting and defiling and lurid and base and harmful are reserved for grown-ups. In other words, kids, when you grow up, you can be as "adult" (read indecent, perverted) as we are.

We have given children and young people something to which they are encouraged to aspire. We have told them that someday they too can be an "adult." Maybe we need to tell them something else. Maybe we need to say, "You don't want to be an 'adult'; you want to be a 'maturing person.'"

Because, these days, there is a difference.


[Return] to: "Q/A"