I worked for several years in the semiconductor industry. In the course of that time, I've dealt with many industrial strength chemicals, both liquid and gas--each of which had its own peculiar hazards. Some, like arsine (a form of arsenic), if inhaled would cause death in a very unpleasant way. Others were of a caustic nature--they would burn you if you were to come in contact with them. But of all the chemicals that I worked with, one of the most prevalent in the industry was dihydrogen monoxide--or DHMO, for short.
Similarly, there are several dangers involved in handling dihydrogen monoxide. Volumes as small as a test tube's worth coming in contact with bare skin can cause 2nd or 3rd degree burns; in addition, death frequently results from accidental inhalation of even relatively small amounts.
It turns out that just as arsenic occurs naturally in the shells of some shellfish, DHMO also has a naturally occurring isotope; yet it has far reaching implications: just like radon, as a gas it is odorless and colorless, so how can you tell that it is around you? It is said to be the most prevalent greenhouse effect gas, and causes more global warming than CO2, CO and methane combined.
Yet, more disturbing than this--DHMO is one of the biggest additives to modern processed food, including jarred baby food and baby food formula, and supposedly "all-natural" fruit juices. Sadly, it has also been found in the tumors of cancer patients--virtually all of which have ingested food having either been processed with, or containing this chemical.
It's not surprising, then, that there have been questions raised about whether DHMO should be banned; in fact, as part of a recent survey (Spring 2000, 86% in favor. Another poll taken in Fall 2000 still showed 59% in favor, as reported on the webpage http://www.dhmo.org/research.html) conducted at the prestigious University of Notre Dame, the majority of students supported a ban of the chemical.
As I said, given all the information we've considered here, it's really not surprising that some would call for a ban of DHMO--but it is unfortunate. You see, those students all supported a ban on the chemical we've called dihydrogen monoxide--but which is better known as H2O, or common, everyday water. All the facts we've looked at were true; but they were presented in a way that would support a particular agenda--in this case, putting the chemical DHMO in a bad light. If you had known all the facts though, you would certainly agree that to ban it would cause far more damage than good!
The point to be made here is that we must be very careful in accepting what we hear. Whatever information we're given, and by whatever media, if we're to be responsible in society, we have an obligation to check that information out and make sure that it's the truth before we act on it--and there is no facet of life in which this obligation is more important than in the area of religion. The stakes are far too high: we ought not to be gambling our souls just on someone's say-so. Even though Paul the apostle called himself the foremost, or chief, of sinners because he was "formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent aggressor," as we read in 1 Tim 1:13-15, he was still able, in Acts 23:1 to say, "Brethren, I have lived my life with a perfectly good conscience before God up to this day." What he said was not contradictory; he had a good conscience because he sincerely believed that God was pleased with him persecuting the church. If, when he was persecuting Christians, someone had asked him if Jesus was the Christ, he would have said, "Certainly not!" Did his sincerity make him right? No; certainly not. Simply because someone is sincere about what they are saying doesn't make what they have to say accurate.
It seems that today, more than ever, we are assailed with various preachers, books, radio programs, and so on; and each has its own particular slant on what God has said, and each one very sincere. What then should be our attitude?
In Acts 17:10-12, we find that Paul and Silas traveled "...to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. Therefore many of them believed, along with a number of prominent Greek women and men."
There are several things that we can learn from this passage that deal with what we are discussing. First, we see that those of Berea received the word with great eagerness--they listened to what Paul and Silas said intently; more than that, they were eager to hear what he said. So often, it seems that looking into God's word and coming to meet with his children becomes more of an obligation than a desire; but, if we expect to gain anything from a study of His Bible, we need to be excited about the chances times that we get to study or meet with His church.
Second, the Bereans examined the scriptures to see if what was said was so. They compared what Paul and Silas were teaching with the proper standard--God's word. Any time we are to decide if someone is teaching the truth, we ought not to compare it to creed-books or traditions; rather, we must go straight to the source--we must compare it to the word of God. Anything less is just going on another man's word.
Third, they examined the scriptures daily, not just on the Sabbath. If we want to be able to refute error; if we would stand firmly in God's word, we must be familiar with it--which means we, too, must look into the word of God daily, and not just on Sunday. We need to get our head into the book, and the book into our head.
Fourth, they examined the Scriptures to see if what Paul and Silas taught was true. They were prepared to set aside what they had believed, and stand beside Paul and Silas--if they found what had been taught to be true. If we have compared what someone is teaching with God's word and what they teach is found to be false, i.e. it contradicts His word, we must reject it. In like manner, though, if we've objectively found it to be the truth, i.e. it is in harmony with His word--we must accept it, even if we don't like it, or it's implications.
In John 5:38-41, Jesus told the Jews who sought to kill him, "You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent. You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life..."
They, too, searched, or examined, the scriptures; but, they refused to see that those very scriptures proclaimed that Jesus was the Christ. Jesus wasn't what they were expecting in a Messiah. We must not only be willing to look into the scriptures, but to look into them objectively, without our preconceived ideas. It may be that we'll find that what we've been taught and what we have always thought... just isn't true.
The Bereans in Acts 17 had these attitudes, and were commended for it; they were said to have been "noble-minded." What's more, it was because of these attitudes that we find in verse 12 that, "many of them believed."
When we read the newspaper or watch the news, often we'll do so with a critical eye. We may wonder what kind of spin has been put on the story by the reporter. If that is true with this physical world, how much more important is it in the spiritual realm? Just as with every news media (be it television, radio, or the newspaper) what we hear may sound reasonable on the surface, but closer examination may show that some of the facts are twisted, in the wrong context, or simply untrue--very much like our discussion of the "facts" about dihydrogen monoxide.
Whether someone is teaching things about God and His will for us through a sermon, a book, or a radio program, we must, like the Bereans, search the scriptures daily to find out whether these things are so. We can't believe every impassioned plea; we have to check out the information by going to the source--the Bible. We must consider everything carefully in light of God's word, putting aside our preconceived ideas; and if, when we've done so, we find what's taught to be truth--we have an obligation to embrace it, regardless of the consequences, knowing that in the end we will receive a reward.
