Let’s get with it. No more fuddy-duddy sermons on such abstract things as divine election, sanctification, prayer, heaven-hell, salvation, divine adoption, and the like. Let’s be relevant. Let’s have sermons on the Blacks, dope addiction, Vietnam, civil disobedience, mail strikes, pollution, abortion and revolution. So cry some non-relevant critics.

Yes, let the church preach on these subjects. It ought to. If it doesn’t, it neglects its duty. The Bible does speak on these issues and we need full sermons on these important subjects.

But if anyone thinks that preaching about the old-fashioned doctrines of heaven-hell, faith and prayer is non-relevant, 1 would like to hear what their opinion will be when they wake up in hell. They will then find out what real relevancy is as they sweat it out in the pit of hell, where the fire is never put out and the worm never dies and the blackness of night eternally surrounds them, alone, with no loving companionship.

Yes, let’s get with it. Let’s be relevant. Let’s preach hell, fire and damnation. And faith in Christ. And prayer. And God’s eternal love to those who trust in Christ Jesus. That’s real relevancy that will outshine all the problems of race, abortion, violence and addiction.



Strange bedfellows: CEFers and anti-abortionists. But it is a fact: those who are for government aid to all children in all schools are usually the same ones who are for the respect of life in utero.

Who is interested in CEF? Not the Modernist Protestant or the humanistic secularist, but the orthodox, Bible-believing Protestant—the one who believes that Jesus Christ is God, Savior and Lord the one who wants to acknowledge him in all his ways, even in education.

Neither are all Jews interested in CEF. The Reform and Conservative Jews, who are really the liberal, left-wing of judaism, oppose CEF. But the Orthodox branch—is in CEF.

In Catholicism there is a split, today, too. The theologically liberal Catholics do not by and large join CEF, but the orthodox Catholics do, those who hold the great teachings of the church in its past.

Thus there is a common bond between the CEFers of different denominations: belief in the historical teachings of their churches, a desire to have a God-centered education. And in each case this represents the more conservative wing of their church.

Similarly, it is the same group, generally speaking, that appreciates the sanctity of life. The Reform Jew is for killing babies in utero. His Judaism is more of form than substance. He is the Modernist of the Protestant church, who no longer holds to what he thinks are ancient, silly teachings of the denomination in a scientific age. Likewise, it is the Protestant theological liberal, who is not bound by external authority of the Word of God who is the pro-abortionist. To him the convenience of his life is more important than the sanctity of another’s life. So he advocates abortion as well as euthanasia. Within Catholic circles, it is the avant-garde rebellers against both papal and Biblical authority that promote abortion.

Thus there is often a common bond between CEFers and antiabortionists.



I used to give to the Planned Parenthood Association because I believe it is Biblical and desirable to spread birth control information—especially among the poor. Too many poor people have children that they do not want and cannot raise, either financially or with love and discipline. And that is not Biblical.

But I no longer give because the national executive director, Dr. Alan Guttmacher, is now pushing for abortion. One reason? To plan parenthood! This is the way to keep the population in control.

Such a policy is horrible and not biblical. The child in utero is not part of the mother’s body: from the moment of conception it is a human being, even though not fully developed. From conception the basic characteristics of the child are determined: its sex, color of eyes, etc. On the tenth day veins develop; the fourteenth, a mouth, on the twenty-first day the heart beats; on the fifty-sixth day, all the organs are present.

To take the life of a child before birth is not essentially different from taking the life after birth. The cutting of the umbilical cord does not make the child in the image of God: that image is there from conception. And to destroy it, is to do despite to God who made the unborn child in his image. James says that we ought not to even curse someone, let alone kill him, because he is made in God’s image (James 3:9).

To take the innocent life of the unborn is not planning parenthood. Human life is already formed in the womb. The people are already parents. The use of contraceptives is to plan parenthood: the use of abortion is to abolish parenthood by destroying innocent human life.

This is why I can no longer support the Planned Parenthood Association, whose national head is an ardent proponent of abortion.