Now I have a documentary tonight that is going to last about a half hour - thatís going to take a lot of the time. But I want to say a few words first then Iím going to show you the documentary then Iím going to have comment to fill the rest of the time.
This evening just before I went over to the television studio where I did another program on television that youíll see a few weeks from now, thatís two Iíve recorded this week by-the-way, and then I just had time to get to my office and prepare something to say to you here tonight. And here I am, but when I was home for a very late lunch, we had a long meeting this morning that lasted until about two oíclock or two-thirty, two-fifteen or something like that, of the advisory council. And we had a long council meeting, so I took about three minutes after lunch to go in and relax in front of television and this man Donahue was on.
I suppose some of you have seen the Donahue program. He has a group of women - sometimes there will be a couple or three men, but itís mostly women and itís all a discussion of people getting along with people. And what a discussion it is. Someone says well I think this, well I think that and someone else thinks something else - everybody has a different idea and nobody knows what they are talking about at all. Itís just a show and the main thing is to make it interesting enough that people will look so that they will watch the commercials so they can sell you some merchandise.
Now the film Iím going to show you in just a few minutes is titled I think, ďUnderstanding Human BehaviorĒ, ďUnderstanding Human Behavior.Ē I saw it on an educational program, not on one of the regular channels. But channel 28 is an educational channel about - about three weeks ago. I think it was just before Christmas. And Christmas by-the-way thatís something the world observes, you may not know what I mean - I hope. [Audience laughs] Anyway, I thought then that that would make a good example for a Bible study and so I procured that film and had our television people procure it for me.
And now at the beginning youíll find a woman judge, Iíll tell you a few things youíre going to see on the film. I want you to watch for it as you see the film. A woman judge, of course, is in command. And she is talking to two psychologists, one is a man and of course the other is a woman. And it is an idea about whether a certain man should be brought to trial and whether he is sane or not. Now one psychiatrist thinks that he is insane and should not be brought to trial. The other one disagrees - youíll see it on the film. Now the first says that he can - oh I wrote this down in such a way now, itís pretty blurred I donít know that I can read it. Oh, the first says that he believes that this man thatís in question as to whether he should be tried, that he can discern right from wrong and therefore he is sane and should go on trial. The second disagrees and thinks he couldnít discern right from wrong.
Before you get through youíll see that the judges; the courts; the lawyers; the psychologists; psychiatrists, they canít any of them tell - distinguish between right and wrong. I want you to watch it now. Youíll notice that the psychologists do not understand the make-up of the human mind. They donít even know of what the human mind is composed. You have to get that in the Bible. And of course they donít believe in the Bible, itís not scientific. And these gentlemen, who know less than nothing, are quite scientific. Now they talk about our culture and the various cultures and whatever the local culture approves must be right.
But there doesnít seem to be any authority to discern what is right from what is wrong. Itís a matter of opinion. And thatís what you get on the Donahue Show and thatís what you get in courts of law, - thatís what you get anywhere.
Oh another thing youíll find quoted there is that all we have to judge human behavior is opinion, just the opinions of people to judge whether human behavior is right or wrong. And opinions of course vary and disagree. Then they come on to demon possession. And it is not recognized by science or the world or by law or by the judges. There canít be any demons - that is not scientific! Anything that is spirit is unscientific therefore it doesnít exist. Now by the same token there is no God and God does not exist. So, we come to the scientific approach you will notice. We come to the scientific approach. Now the father of this scientific approach was Hippocrates, the father of medicine, and who initiated the Hippocratic Oath. Youíll notice that in the film. Belief in God you will notice is a superstition; I donít think they mention God in that light, but I think youíll get that meaning from it.
Various things like what might be called insanity or what really is demon possession are all caused by physical causes only. Of course the human brain is just a human brain - they donít know thereís a spirit in the modern brain or in the brain of man. Modern - well itís always been that way since man was on the earth. So they have physical knowledge only. Now the real conclusion, though they donít state it this way, but itís the idea that I got when I first saw it and I see they state this rather at the beginning but not at the end Ė is that manís law - the courts of law; the judges; the lawyers; the courts, do not know right from wrong. And yet the test of insanity is supposed to be if you know right from wrong you are sane, if you donít you are insane. Well I think they are mostly insane. Iíll leave it to what you think. So I think now we will see that film for about thirty minutes and Iíll wait here and then Iíll have a few more comments to make.
Judge: Without expression and for three weeks Iíve stared back at it, trying to see a man who would deliberately murder his own mother and father. And now, after three weeks, I canít say that I have seen him, but I canít say he isnít there either. Is this young man really the cold blooded killer he is accused of being? Is his emotionless stupor only an act? Or is he the genuine victim of some mental disorder? If we convict him, will we punish a poor insane man with laws made only for the sane? But, but if we acquit him, will we give freedom to a murderer clever enough to feign insanity, and vicious enough to kill again? In all my years in court I have never faced a harder decision. And all the testimony of the experts hasnít made it any easier.
Judge: Iíve asked you here to summarize the testimony that each of you has given in court, Dr Hartshorne will you begin?
Dr Hartshorne: Your Honor, based the results of several widely recognized test, I believe the defendant is capable of distinguishing right from wrong. In my opinion he may stand trial as a sane person.
Dr Rollins: Your Honor, I completely disagree.
Judge: Very well, Dr Rollins, what is your opinion?
Dr Rollins: Your Honor, this young man is so totally lost in his own world that heís incapable of knowing the consequences of his smallest act. I long ago discarded the use of tests. I base my judgment on several personal encounters with the patient and after several such meetings I can professionally state that this defendant cannot be held responsible for his crime.
Dr Hartshorne: Your Honor, thatís completely unrealistic.
Judge: Well Dr Smith, Dr Hartshorne thinks our defendant is sane. Dr Rollins feels he isnít. With whom do you agree?
Dr Smith: With neither Your Honor and with both. You see the minds perception of right or wrong is far too subtle an affair to be labeled either sane or insane. I mean who are we to say that anyoneís notion of morality is inferior to our own? Let me just site a few examples: In 1965 a young gentleman was brought to me...
Announcer: Our murder trial is a fictitious one, but the debate over sanity and insanity is quite real. It all began in 1843 when an Englishman named Daniel McNaughton went on trial for murder. It wasnít an ordinary murder case. For one thing McNaughtonís intended victim had been Sir Robert Peel, the Prime Minister of England. McNaughtonís shot missed and killed Sir Robertís secretary instead. But McNaughtonís motive for his crime was also rather unusual; he firmly believed that he alone was being persecuted by an entire political party - the Tory Party headed by the Prime Minister. So the McNaughton case was that of a man who had committed a murder for a reason that was clearly insane. If McNaughton had not been insane, would he have committed the crime? The courts answer was no. McNaughton was acquitted; it was the first verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity".
The McNaughton decision was one of the earliest social recognitions of a problem that has long troubled psychologists. The problem of abnormal behavior, and it provided the law with its first definition of insanity; the inability to distinguish right from wrong. Well that definition may have satisfied the legal profession in 1843, but it doesnít satisfy many modern psychologists. Since McNaughtonís time an explosion of psychological research has made deciding what is normal behavior and what is abnormal behavior even more difficult.
For example, we now know that our culture influences how we act. Cultures come in a wide variety. Whatís considered abnormal behavior in one may be quite alright in another. What would you say if someone told you that every year one of these men puts on a strange ritual costume and then dances in public while eating rose petals? Would you say his behavior was normal? What do you think his fellow construction workers would say?
Well, this man is also a construction worker, but he lives in a Moslem Buddhist culture on the island of Bali. Once a year he goes into a trance so deep that he cannot feel safety pins stuck through his cheeks. And he dances all day in a religious ritual drama. He and the other dancers roll on broken glass. They tear open coconuts with their teeth. And yes, they eat rose petals. Tomorrow heíll be back at work. No one will think he is strange, his culture approves of his behavior. And that leaves psychologists with a problem. If notions of normal and abnormal change with culture, is abnormal behavior only a matter of opinion? Is there any behavior which is universally abnormal?
But even in one culture behavior changes frequently. We adjust our behavior to time and place and circumstances. *music in background* ĒWhatís considered normal at one time might be abnormal at another. It depends upon the situation; actually we usually consider behavior normal when it what we call Ďappropriateí. That is appropriate to the situation in our opinion. So perhaps normality is also only a matter of opinion. Maybe opinions are all we have for judging human behavior. If thatís so why do psychologists persist in looking for other explanations of abnormal behavior? Well the fact is that itís not really an academic problem.
There are people whose behavior is recognized by every culture as abnormal. And these people suffer greatly and often do harm to others. In America alone there are three to four million of these people. Thereís nothing theoretical about the pain that they feel or the pain they cause; so psychologists do their best to understand the abnormal in the hope that some of this suffering can be prevented or eased. In order to treat patients, psychologists need to make some decisions about what is abnormal.
They often consider a person abnormal if he distorts reality so much that he canít function in the everyday world, or if he causes pain or harm to himself or others. Now those criteria may seem overly simple - even arbitrary, but some other definitions havenít been so objective.
In ancient times people who acted strangely in any way were either killed or worshipped. Their behavior was said to be the work of gods. If these gods were good the abnormal people were thought to be a bit divine themselves and were duly honored by the community.
Perhaps the most famous of these was the Phthia of ancient Greece. She was a prophetess chosen from the country girls around the city of Delphi. In her sanctuary she inhaled sulfurous fumes which rose from the earth and fell into a raving delirium the Greeks believed was a visitation from Apollo, god of prophecy. As she raved and ranted mighty kings and ministers gathered around to lay before her decisions of state for they believed that Phthia could foretell the future.
But more often than not the ancients believed that abnormal people were possessed by demons. Evil spirits which threatened the community and superstitious communities rarely took chances with anyone who threatened them. What they could not understand they immediately destroyed.
In the midst of all this exaltation and persecution the scientific approach to abnormality was born. Its father was the famous Hippocrates - the Greek physician for whom the Hippocratic Oath is named. Hippocrates theories about abnormal behavior were uncannily modern. He carefully observed and recorded many symptoms of mental disturbance, and concluded that they were physical illnesses not the whim of the gods. His theories of treatment were no less modern.
He taught his students to shelter patients in the beautiful peaceful grounds of temples. He prescribed rest, exercise, and a moderate diet in the belief that our mental state is basically influenced by our physical condition. Today many doctors and psychologists take a similar organic approach to abnormal behavior. Unfortunately itís taken hundreds of years for us to relearn what Hippocrates knew.
During ancient times the healing temples he founded flourished in Greece. But the fall of Rome lead to the obliteration of ancient science and once again superstition reigned supreme. It was, of course, the same old superstition - the mentally ill were said to be possessed by demons. But something new had been added - Christianity. The church taught that possessed souls could be redeemed by faith, and by the application of certain purifying rituals. These rituals were the new theological science of exorcism, which drove out demons and saved the soul, but only at very great peril to the flesh.
Today most of us would consider exorcism another form of abnormal behavior, but throughout the Middle Ages its therapeutic value was unquestioned. Of course, it couldnít save everyone. Some demons refused to depart from their victims and these unfortunates met the stake, or the rope, or the axe. Not until the eighteenth century was mental illness separated from demonology. And it wasnít until the beginning of our own century that Sigmund Freud and others proposed a new organic theory for abnormal behavior. Nineteen hundred years after Hippocrates abnormality was once again a disease and its treatment passed again from the priest to the physician.
Suppose just for a moment that youíre a doctor - a psychiatrist on duty at a large metropolitan hospital. You exam dozens of patients a day and strangers brought to you from all over the city. Now your job is to decide just how abnormal each one is and to hospitalize them for treatment if necessary. Now every day peopleís lives are in your hands. How do you make your decisions? Well youíd probably use this book; ĎThe Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disordersí: Third Edition, also known as DSM3. Now DSM3 is published by the American Psychiatric Association. Psychiatrists are physicians who are trained to treat mental illnesses. Now although itís not universally accepted DSM3 contains just about everything they believe about abnormal behavior.
DSM3 uses five categories called axes to describe abnormal behavior, psychiatrist rate each patientís behavior on all five. The first three axes try to define some major types of abnormality. This newborn baby is suffering seizures because she too is addicted to the drug her mother is addicted to. Drugs can cause many distortions of behavior. They interfere with the normal functioning of the brain and nervous system. They alter the mind as well as the body, temporarily or sometimes for life.
DSM axes 3 accesses all disorders with a physical cause - from drugs or accidents, diseases, congenital brain damage, anything which alters our physical being. Axes one and two deal in part with some very different problems. Many people who are in perfect physical health can still behave quite abnormally under the right circumstances. Watch what happens when this college student encounters the opposite sex.
ďPeterĒ (Girl calls Peter)
ďExcuse meĒ. (Peter runs off)
Was Peter just startled by the girlís voice? Not at all, he knew perfectly well she was approaching. And he also knew she wanted to go to a concert. But for Peter, a girlís friendly invitation is too terrifying to accept.
Girl: ďWhat happened, you ran away so fast I didnít know what happened.Ē
Peter: ďI spilled ink on me look. Iím filthy. I tried to get the ink off, itís ruined.Ē
Girl: ďOh come, on you can get another shirt. Look what do you say we forget the library for tonight? We can go over to that concert.Ē
Peter: ďOh no I couldnít, I mean Iíve got to try and get this shirt clean, you know what I mean? I got to go."
Back in his room, Peter is still fearful and anxious. He washes his hands and heíll wash them again and again and again long after theyíre clean. Itís clear that he has two problems. Heís afraid of girls and heís also abnormally concerned with cleanliness. A psychologist would probably say that both problems are related. Many psychiatrists believe that the cause might be a childhood trauma. A painful experience buried deep inside Peterís unconscious memory. Possibly his parents punished him severely for being dirty as a child. Possibly they were harsh with him during toilet training. As a result he places an abnormal value on cleanliness. And he uses his dirty shirt to avoid his attraction to the girl, something else his parents wouldnít approve of.
His ritual of repeated hand washings is another mental defense against all the anxiety he feels. Some psychologists believe that Peter suffers from an obsessive compulsive neurosis. A compulsive person is someone who repeats a physical action like hand washing over and over again for psychological reasons. A neurotic patient is someone who has a mild mental disorder but is able to live a fairly normal life.
Neurotic behavior is usually caused not by physiological problems, but by intra-psychic conflicts; Conflicts that take place within the mind. A neurotic like Peter knows that his behavior is abnormal and he suffers from this knowledge. He doesnít want to act the way he does, but heís unable to control his compulsive actions so he continues to repeat them.
Neurotics who go to a therapist for help usually are not hospitalized. They probably have weekly psychotherapy instead, but a cure might be difficult. Diagnosing intra-psychic conflicts is often like searching for ships lost in the ocean. And treatment of a neurosis may take years of careful work. Physiological and intra-psychic problems are contributing factors in abnormal behavior.
More recently thereís been growing recognition of a third cause and DSM includes it under axis one. Some of these people may be alcoholics. Alcoholism is a terrible American problem. Excessive drinking may begin when people just canít handle the pressures of their social environment. The environment includes work, school, family, other people, everything, and everyone a person can experience. Life can become very complex and very confusing, sometimes too confusing. People may feel trapped or out of control of their lives. To ease the fear these feelings bring, they may turn to alcohol or to many other safety valves; distractions outside the realm of normal behavior.
When a doctor rates a patient using axes one through three, he tries to decide how much of the problem is physiological, how much intra-psychic, and how much social. Then he uses another scale, axis four, to evaluate an important factor in every patientís condition. Stress, everyone feels it. And everyone has to in order to live. But professional or family problems may bring too much stress. And major events in a personís life, such as marriage, divorce, a new job, the death of a loved one can create enough stress to trigger abnormal behavior.
And then the physician must decide whatís wrong and whatís to be done about it? The diagnostic manual has been criticized for assuming that all mental disorders are just like physical diseases. Not allowing for the interaction of physiological, intra-psychic, and social elements. The third edition is still controversial, but itís tried to refine its approach to help therapists get a picture of each patientís physical, mental, and social circumstances; a complete portrait which may improve diagnosis and treatment of the worst behavior disorders.
One of these disorders is schizophrenia. The word means Ďsplit mindí - no one fully understands it. For one thing schizophrenic patients come in a bewildering variety of types. Some are confused in their thinking, others think quite clearly. For example about outer space plots to steal their brains. Many show no emotions, while others show too much emotion. But theyíve all lost contact with everyday reality. Schizophrenia is a psychotic abnormality. Psychotic patients have a severe mental disorder and are usually hospitalized, because they canít function on their own.
Psychologists once thought that schizophrenia was an intrapsychic disorder. But new evidence showed physiological and possibly social causes as well. Probably all three factors play a role in most cases.
Diagnosing schizophrenia is difficult. One reason for the design of DSM3 and also why legal insanity decisions are so difficult to make, but they must be made. Every year there are crimes - sometimes horrible ones committed by people who claim when caught, that theyíre psychotic and therefore incapable of controlling their own behavior. Their lawyers try to convince a judge or jury that this is true. If the lawyers succeed the accused is hospitalized for treatment instead of sentenced to prison or death. The evaluation process is long and difficult and frustrating to those who want justice to be sure and swift, but diagnosing abnormal behavior can never be sure and swift, especially when someone's fate hangs in the balance.
On August 10, 1977 New York City police finally caught up with a multiple murderer who called himself the "Son of Sam". He turned out to be a bright easy-going postal clerk named David Berkowitz. Berkowitz was accused of murdering six people, but he insisted that he was only carrying out orders. Orders he received from evil demons in the form of barking dogs. Two psychiatrists agreed with him and recommended that he not be tried. New Yorkers terrorized for over a year by the Son of Sam were outraged.
Then a third psychiatrist called by the prosecution found Berkowitz sane. He did stand trial and was sentenced to life in prison. Was the decision right or was Berkowitz a victim of New Yorkís search for a culprit? Two years later in a prison press conference Berkowitz himself gave the answer. He admitted he was sane. The demon story had been a lie an attempt to feign insanity; the decision had been correct.
But the legal insanity decisions are sometimes not correct. Some defendants who have been hospitalized and treated kill again after their release from care. But the courts and the examining psychiatrist must do their best and not only in sensational murder cases. Psychiatrists give opinions in over one million legal cases every year. Some cases are bitter divorce battles, some are hotly contested child custody suits with one parent disputing the other's competence in caring for a child. And sometimes court cases are brought by children against an aging parent. The children, adults themselves, claim that the parent is no longer mentally competent and canít manage financial or personal affairs. These tragic cases seldom make headline news, but the need for accurate diagnosis is just as difficult; and the results as serious.
Suppose youíre a judge. The decision is yours - sane or insane. Well maybe itís both. An answer like that wouldnít help a judge, but it does reflect current psychological thinking even though insanity is a legal and not a psychological term. After all their research into the worlds of normal and abnormal, psychologists have concluded that most of us spend some time in both. And we probably arenít quite as different from a criminally insane defendant as weíd like to think.
By some strange local culture in some ignorant part of the world determine right from wrong - where is the authority? This world doesnít know right from wrong and this world is in deep trouble. This world is in an almost unbelievable paradox as Iíve said time and time again.
Here we are in a world, in some areas of the world, of awesome progress, awesome accomplishment. And Iíve said things like for example television, the motion picture, the electric light, sending men to the moon and back, close up photographs right from the surface of Mars; things that they can do, but all of that progress at the same time accompanied by appalling evils. Heartache, suffering, nearly everybody on earth is discontented and unhappy. Thereís no happiness anymore. Everybody is seeking some kind of excitement, some kind of sensual thrill, some kind of excitement or amusement.
The world is in trouble, the world is full of violence, of every crime, of every evil, as I have said so many times. Husband and wife canít get along, parents and children canít get along, even brother and sister canít get along, or a pair of sisters or brothers. Family canít get along with next door neighbor; capital canít get along with labor. Black canít get along with white, or white with black, they canít get along together. Nation canít get along with nation, group canít get along with group. And we have troubles and they donít know how to solve these troubles in our courts.
I was down a couple of weeks ago at the University of Southern California campus, I mentioned that once before, and I went through the School of Law. They have quite a large building I think they have one or two other buildings devoted to it, but the principle building I went through. Teaching people to become lawyers and judges, to judge between person and person, disputes, misunderstandings. Well I believe this, I believe that, I think this, I think that. And no one seems to know what is true. There seems to be no authority. No one seems to know right from wrong.
Everything is a matter of cause and effect, for every effect there has to be a cause. For all of the troubles in the world, something is causing them. And I can tell you in a word what is causing them and I donít have to convince you people, because Iím sure you already know. Itís just a little three letter word s-i-n. Sin. Now what is sin? I John 3:4;
"...sin is the transgression of law [or of the law]." (I John 3:4)
Now in Romans 7 and verse fourteen, Paul is speaking about the law of God and that is the one that determines spiritual sin.
"For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal [and] sold under sin." (Romans 7:14)
A spiritual law. Now the spiritual law is the law of God and it is summed up in one word, love. L-O-V-E. Only four letters. And I reduce that for simplicity to a lot of people to the four letter word give. G-I-V-E. Itís always out flowing love - itís never in coming because that would be lust or coveting.
It is vanity Ė I love me and I do not love you, but I want to get the best of you, I want to take from you, I want to get from you. Iím going to protect my interest and protect them from you. And that has caused all of the trouble in the world; all of the heartaches; all of the violence; all of the pain. the sorrow and the suffering.
Letís turn to Romans the fifth chapter. Romans 5 and verse twelve;
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." (Romans 5:12)
Now it started with one man, Adam. Letís look back at that now once again for just a few moments. And in Genesis 1:26, God had said, "Let us make man in our imageÖ" (Genesis 1:26)
The word for God as it begins in the first verse of Genesis one is Elohim. Elohim created the heavens and the earth and Elohim consisted of two people as described in John 1:1-4 in the New Testament.
"In the beginning was the WordÖ" (John 1:1)
The Word is a personage, the Word was with God. God was another personage, so there were two and each was immortal and each had always existed. There never was a time when they did not exist - they didnít have beginning of life.
"Without father, without mother, having neither beginning of life nor end of daysÖ" (Hebrews 7:3), as you read in Hebrews. God said, "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26). They made cattle after the cattle kind, other animals after their animal kind. But they made man after the God kind and man was made to become God. God is reproducing Himself and so He made man so that man could reproduce himself as a type of the reproduction of the spiritual reproduction of man to become God.
Now when He first created man, man was incomplete and he couldnít reproduce himself. So God made a woman to make him complete and they two become one and they could reproduce their own kind. When He made man He made him with a brain. Now He made animals with a brain, but thereís a great distinction. Animals cannot think. Animals have a brain just like a human brain - just as good qualitatively. Elephants, dolphins, whales have larger brains, other animals slightly smaller and some very much smaller, but mostly just as good. Just as good in quality and yet animals canít think, they canít reason, they canít come to decisions. They canít think creatively and design and plan like a man.
God gave man a spirit and that spirit acting with his brain imparts the power of intellect, and makes all the difference between animal brain and human brain. Now our scientists ought to know that. The scientists have studied brains. Theyíve taken brains apart and studied them. They know that the animal brain is as good in quality as the human brain and made precisely like it.
Man has the same type of life as an animal. His life comes with a breath of air, by the circulation of blood, and a heartbeat. And he has to be fueled by food and water out of the ground. So God formed man of the dust of the ground and gave him only a temporary existence. He breathed into his nostrils the breath of air, that breath is what keeps you going - together with the heartbeat.
"And the blood thereof is the life thereof (Genesis 9:4 paraphrased), and the breath is the breath of life. The spirit in man does not give you your life. It only imparts the power of intellect to the brain so that man can think. Now man was made incomplete, not only as a male and he needed a female to make him one. But man was made incomplete with one spirit, he needed another spirit. He needed the Spirit of God and God did not make him with that spirit, but God offered him that spirit. God did not make him with immortal life, God made him only with temporary physical life. Chemical life. Temporarily existing life - just the same as each of us came from an ovum that had a temporary existence not over twenty-eight days, probably less, unless it was fertilized by a male sperm cell, from the male father and from his body.
And each of us was an ovum that became fertilized and then we became an embryo. To use the technical term that medical, so-called science, calls it. After four months we began to assume a little human form. Now we were fed by the mother on physical food that it came from the ground, we began to grow. After four months we began to assume a human form and shape. There was a torso or trunk, legs and arms began to sprout out and appear, and a head, a heart began to form inside and other organs inside of the body. And for five more months totaling up a total of nine months, fed and nourished through the mother and through the - oh what you call it cord. The fetus grew until it was ready to be born and form come in to complete human form and shape and a brain had grown.
Now probably at the first breath, the Bible doesnít tell us at what time, at least the spirit entered that brain. The one spirit, but another spirit was needed. Now if you take verses sixteen and seventeen, here in the second chapter of Genesis,
"And the [Eternal] God commanded the man," (Genesis 2:16)
Heíd planted the Garden of Eden and He put the man in the garden after he was created to dress it and to keep it. And in the midst of the garden were the two very symbolic trees with special significance and meaning, different from other trees in the sense that they had a symbolic meaning. He said,
"Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evilĒ [now a tree of the knowledge of good and evil], thou shalt not eat, because if you eat of that, He said, Thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17 paraphrased)
The man had to make a decision. Now those two trees mean everything. Man did not have immortal life. He only had a temporary existence, but God gave him an opportunity to receive life. God made life available. The Tree of Life would have given him life and he didnít have life. He only had a temporary existence. How would God have given him life? How would He have done it? Well how does God give us life today? There were the two trees; how does God give us life today?
If you turn in the Bible to Acts now, the second chapter and verses thirty-seven, thirty-eight, and thirty-nine. Peter had preached a sermon on the day of Pentecost. The Holy Spirit had come and descended visibly in the form of flaming tongues of fire on each one of the 120, who had remained from the preaching of Jesus and received the Holy Spirit there that day. Only 120 out of thousands upon thousands who heard Jesus preach. Only the 120 believed what He had said.
People never believe God. Adam didnít believe God. And these people didnít believe God, but now after Peterís sermon and after they saw this miracle and heard the Holy Spirit coming like a sound of a rushing mighty wind. Like a wind storm, if youíve ever heard one. They asked Peter;
"Men and brethren what shall we do?" And then "Peter said unto them, Repent." (Acts 2:37-38)
Thatís the hardest thing in the world to do for anybody. Repent means admit youíre wrong.
You know you can never cure an alcoholic until he admits he is one and he hates to admit it. The hardest thing for any man to do is admit he is wrong - to repent! Heíd rather be self-righteous, heíd rather say Iím not wrong. Iíve never done wrong. Iíve know people that have never, never admitted they were wrong about anything. Theyíve never been knocked down like Saul was who became the Apostle Paul. Theyíve never been conquered. Youíve seen some wild colts and theyíre useless until theyíre broken. They have to be conquered - they have to be broken and then they can be used. And God canít use one of us until weíre conquered and broken and repent, so that we can receive His spirit.
Peter said unto them repent! Thatís change your mind. Admit how wrong you are and how wrong youíve been in your thinking and your way change your whole attitude,your whole direction, your goals, everything youíve been living for. Turn to a different kind of life "and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sinsÖ" (Acts 2:38)
Being baptized is merely the outward ceremony of showing a death into the water and a burial then coming up out of the water typifying a final resurrection, showing our faith in Christ. So that repentance and faith are the twin conditions to receiving Godís Holy Spirit, but it means a total change from within. Iíve said itís like this light here, for example, I turn it and you see a light bulb but thereís no light in it. Now if I turn it on and let the current come in, it lights it up; itís the same way the Holy Spirit will light us up.
Now I do have something that Iím going to show on some sermons and speeches where I want to show this. Where I have a - oh what do you call it - where I turn the light back off then turn on a little at a time gradually? We donít receive the Holy Spirit full measure all at once that is true. We have to grow in the spirit after we receive Godís Spirit. But nevertheless, God has terms and conditions and the way we receive life is through the Holy Spirit and He said... then you shall receive, see..."...Repent every one of you and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38)
Now what does that have to do with you when you receive the gift of the Holy Spirit? Well you read in Romans, for example, in Romans 8 and verse nine; "if the spirit of God dwell in you, you are no longer in the flesh, but in spirit, but if the spirit of God does not dwell in you, you are none of Christís". (Romans 8:9 paraphrased). You are not a Christian. I donít care how many churches you belong to. You are not a Christian unless the spirit of God is dwelling in you and unless it is leading you, because you read a few verses later and it says, "...as many as are led by the spirit of God they are the sons of God." (Romans 8:14)
You have to be led by the spirit of God. Now the spirit of God is going to open your mind, it is going to show you right way to live. And you have to follow that Way, but verse eleven, Romans eight, that if the spirit of God: "...if the Spirit of him that raised up Christ from the dead, dwell in you; He that raised up Jesus from the dead will also quicken [or make immortal] your mortal body by His spirit that dwelleth in you." (Romans 8:11)
That is the way we get immortal life.
But now one other thing about the Holy Spirit I want you to notice in first Corinthians the second chapter. Beginning with verse nine, Paul was mentioning how he had not spoken in lofty words and all that sort of thing, but just plain speech and plain language.
"But [he said], as it is written [quoting scripture], Eye has not seen nor ear heard neither entered into the heart [or the mind] of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him (I Corinthians 2:9). They donít know spiritual things - they donít have spiritual knowledge. They have no concept of spiritual knowledge.
Now Godís law is a spiritual law. Godís law does not tell you how to build a desk like this, how to make a lamp out of metal like that, or a microphone like that. Godís law doesnít tell you how to deal with things; it tells you how to have a relationship with God and how to deal with people. Now all of the troubles in this world have come from the fact that people donít know how to deal with people. Thatís what you were just seeing in this film that we showed. They donít know how to deal with people, and thatís what has caused all of the troubles in this world. People canít get along with people. People have done pretty well with things. Thatís why weíve had such phenomenal progress, such awesome progress and accomplishments all dealing with matter.
Now Adam had a choice to make. Well Iím going to show you a little more here before I go back to that before. Verse 10 now, I have read verse nine - because the natural mind of man canít understand the spiritual knowledge of God.
"But God hath revealed them unto us [how], by his Spirit [that dwelleth in us], yea even the deep things of God." (I Corinthians 2:10)
In other words spiritual knowledge and you gain spiritual knowledge by having the Holy Spirit.
Brethren I have found I can proclaim spiritual knowledge, I can teach it, I preach it, people hear it. Either I speak to them personally or I speak to a group and I give them real spiritual truth and knowledge and you know they donít see it. They donít get it; they donít get it, they canít get it unless they have the Holy Spirit. A carnal mind gets a certain materialistic part of it, but they donít get the real spiritual content of it. They cannot!. The Holy Spirit not only gives you life, it also opens your mind to receive spiritual knowledge; how to deal with people, how to have a contact with God.
Now letís go a little further while weíre right on this scripture.
God has revealed this spiritual knowledge these things unto us; "...by His Spirit for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea the deep things of God." (I Corinthians 2:10)
Another scripture says that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of a sound mind and a mind of understanding. (II Timothy 1:7)
Now, "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man that is in him." (I Corinthians 2:11)
A man... an animal canít know the things a man knows! An animal canít understand the material knowledge that a man has and canít do the things that a man can do. It is the Spirit in man that opens his mind to comprehend physical knowledge - materialistic knowledge.
Now "Even so [in the same way] the things of God [ or spiritual knowledge] knoweth no man, [even though he has the spirit of man, he does not know save by] the spirit of God." (I Corinthians 2:11 )
The Spirit of God only can open your mind to comprehend spiritual knowledge. And that is knowledge for a contact with God and knowledge for a right relationship with people.
How then when they teach law, when they teach sociology, when they teach psychology and they donít even know the makeup of the human mind and they donít know thereís a spirit in the human brain; how can they teach you anything about psychology, or psychiatry? Brethren what they donít know, they donít know that they donít know it. In their ignorance they just donít know. But God reveals those things by His spirit.
Now again youíll notice here in verse - let me see verse 14,
"But the natural man [just the natural mind which is a carnal mind and in Romans 8:7 it says]...the carnal mind is enmity [or that is hostile], against God and is not subject to the law of God [which is a spiritual law] neither indeed can be" (Romans 8:7). It just canít be.
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him:" (I Corinthians 2:14)
And they are! Theyíre foolishness to a scientist. The scientist says spiritual things do not exist, theyíre not scientific. Nothing is scientific but what he can see or hear or smell or taste or feel - nothing. It doesnít exist, so he says. And it doesnít exist in his mind, because he knows nothing about it in his ignorance.
Now that explains the spirit in man. Now there were two kinds of knowledge that faced Adam back in the Garden of Eden. Letís go back to that now just a moment. Well I donít need to read the scripture, but letís just go back to it. One, the tree of life. The other was a tree of knowledge of good and evil - but it was going to result in death. So each tree was a tree of knowledge. One was a tree of knowledge - spiritual knowledge - that could come only through the Holy Spirit: the Tree of Life. If Adam had taken that he wouldnít have received immortality immediately, he would have received immortality just like God offers it to you and me in His church. We first get the Holy Spirit Ė we have to grow in grace and the knowledge of our Lord and Savior. Just like the human fetus had to grow in its motherís womb before it could be born. And we canít be born of God until we have developed the spiritual character ready to be born.
We are... the spirit of God witnesses with our spirit, the spirit in man that we are the children of God. And again in I John three, I think it's verse two:
"Behold now we are - already -the children of God, but it doesnít appear yet what we shall be - it doesnít appear - but we know that when Christ appears we will be like Him." (I John 3:2 paraphrased)
And this vile body will then be changed like His glorified body. With His face and countenance shining like the sun, His eyes like flames of fire. Quite different than the way we are now.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. Weíre only heirs now, weíve not been born again now. I put that very strongly on a broadcast today, youíll hear it probably in about, I donít know maybe six weeks before itíll get on the air. But I did a program this afternoon and I think a lot of people are not going to like it very well.
Thought I had something in my notes here that I donít find, so I guess I didnít put it on.
But Adam chose self-acquired knowledge. Now the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, when Adam took that he took to himself the knowledge of good and evil. In other words he decided to decide for himself the knowledge of right and wrong. And you saw from this film men donít know right from wrong. In one culture one thing is wrong - in another culture itís right and vice-versa.
Itís about time we understood these basic things and the causes of all the woes and troubles in the world today. This is not a happy world. Oh we can talk about any number of other things, but theyíre of no consequence by comparison to this basic truth. This is the great truth that we need to know. This is the basic truth and Iím going to harp on this truth until I hope some of you are going to thoroughly digest it and understand it. Because I know that some of you donít get it yet, and they say oh thereís Mr. Armstrong back on those two trees. Iíd better stay on them awhile longer until some of you get it. Of course the scientists say the spiritual knowledge is not scientific.
So anyway Adam took knowledge that he already had been created to be able to acquire. That is knowledge that can come only through the eye, or the ear, or the nose or the smell of taste and feel. Now that is only physical knowledge. You canít see spirit you canít see spiritual truth or spiritual knowledge or you canít hear it and you canít gain that kind of knowledge through the eye the ear or the sense of smell, smell or touch or feel. Thatís why I just read to you in I Corinthians 2, "Eye has not seen nor ear heard nor is it entered into the mind of man" (I Corinthians 2:9 paraphrased). Spiritual knowledge - it canít enter except through the Holy Spirit.
Now Adam chose to take to himself the knowledge of right and wrong. That meant human acquired knowledge; knowledge acquirable by a human on his own power without God and without the Spirit of God. And thatís what he acquired. I donít need to go into the rest of it how God shut up the tree of life when Adam made that decision and it was appointed to all have sinned since Adam and so death has entered by sin. And "...it is appointed to [all] men once to die [and] after this the judgment."(Hebrews 9:27) And then "as in Adam all die ...so in Christ shall [the same] all be made alive [in a resurrection]"(I Corinthians 15:22) But most of that is to a final judgment that we celebrate on the last day after the Feast of Tabernacles.
But Adam chose knowledge humanly acquirable - not knowledge that could be revealed from God through the Holy Spirit. Now the one tree would have given him life but it also would have given him spiritual knowledge. The other tree resulted in death, but it was a tree of human acquired knowledge that would result in death; so both were trees of knowledge - two kinds of knowledge. One was the kind of knowledge to have a relationship with God and to deal with other people and get along with people in peace and harmony and co-operation and in love. The other was a tree that showed knowledge to deal with matter, with things, but he didnít know how to deal with people and he didnít know how to deal with God. In fact he didnít want to deal with God. He just cut himself off from God. And mankind today doesnít want to hear anything about God.
Now we come to the kind of knowledge that has developed and education. What is education? Define education. In the Encyclopedia Britannica it gives this definition of education: That education is the process by which an adult generation inculcates or infuses by this system of education into the minds of the oncoming generation and the children growing up, their own concepts and ideas of knowledge; their own ideas of right and wrong and material knowledge but also knowledge in sociology, knowledge of psychology, which they know nothing about when you get down to it.
And they are confined to materialistic knowledge and when they try to get into the area of the knowledge of people dealing with people, they are all mixed up. But they say that spiritual knowledge is not scientific. And of course if that is true then God is not scientific and God doesnít develop, doesnít exist I mean.
Now how did education then develop? Well human beings thought out their own ideas of what is God. They created their own gods. They thought they devised their own religions. I entertained a man very high in one of the oriental religions in my home for a while last night. Now naturally I wish to be courteous in every way to him. Iím going to meet his king on this next trip, but where did he get his knowledge? He got it from other people that teach the same thing and where did it originate, from some man who originated it; only from a human source of a man who could only have knowledge of how to deal with things but tried to formulate a knowledge of how to deal with people. And they are very concerned in that religion about how to deal with people, but they donít really know how. Nobody can know how unless it comes from the one source, the one authority, which is God, and that can only come through the Holy Spirit.
So superstitions grew religions, different gods, and superstitions. And so the educated people today think all religion is superstition, and much of it is indeed. But along in the last couple hundred years has come the theory and the doctrine of evolution. That is the atheistís explanation of a presence of a creation without a creator, without the previous creation and thinking and designing of a creator.
So all knowledge today taught in our school systems and in the colleges and the universities is based on the basic premise or the basic concept of evolution. Everything is seen through the eyeglasses of evolution. And if evolution is false their knowledge is false. Thatís the trunk of the tree and all of the branches fall with it when you knock the trunk down. And I have knocked it down and I can knock it down.
Now they say there is no such thing as spirit - there are no demons. Itís just mental, itís all physical, itís all in a physical brain and thereís no spirit in the brain. They think itís all physical. How do they explain the difference between the animal brain and the human mind when the brain is the same? And the one is just as good as the other and in many cases even larger and more of it.
Well, letís turn for a minute now to Ephesians. Ephesians 6 beginning with verse 11.
"Put on the whole armor of God [and we need to in our time of troubles such as this world is in today], that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not [in our troubles today that weíre in this dog race that weíre wrestling against, we wrestle not] against flesh and blood [or other people like they think] but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness [or wicked spirits it could better be translated], in high places." (Ephesians 6:11-12)
Speaking of spiritual wickedness that is influencing this entire world, turn over to the twelfth chapter of Revelation and in verse seven it says, "There was war in heaven," (Revelation 12:7) And that is right about this time, I think that very likely it has happened within the last few years. I think it happened slightly before the state of California started persecuting this church.
"...there was war in heaven: Michael [a great archangel] and his angels fought against the dragon; and dragon fought and his angels [who were now demons]. And prevailed not; neither was [his] place found anymore in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world [including all of these intellectuals in the universities of this world...deceiveth the whole world:] he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." (Revelation 12:7-9)
Now Iíd like to go finally now to the first chapter of Romans. When we come to this thing of knowledge, self-acquired knowledge, human acquired knowledge, or the real spiritual knowledge. Spiritual knowledge is far more real than the materialistic knowledge, only they donít know it and as I say what they donít know, they donít know that they donít know. And to them and in their minds it just is non- existent, it doesnít exist.
But begin now with the twentieth verse the first chapter of Romans.
"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse." (Romans 1:20)
God says that even with their carnal minds they ought to understand this, they are without excuse. "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God," (Romans 1:21)
And in ancient times they did they did know something about God. God talked to Cain, Cain knew something about God. God warned him, but he went ahead and killed his brother anyway. Then he tried to complain his punishment was greater than he could bear.
"...neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened". (Romans 1:21) This is speaking of the intellectuals; this is speaking of the educated of our day.
"Professing themselves to be wise [and highly educated], they became fools. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and (who) worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator [that is the created or the human and what is created in matter more than the Creator], Öwho is blessed forever, Amen.Ē (Romans 1:22-25)
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature [and so did the men]: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." [or fit or adequate]. (Romans 1:26-27).
"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge [is God in the knowledge disseminated in our universities today? Name one. And even if they mention God, they donít know God. They donít understand Him, they donít have His spirit, they donít have understanding]. Öeven as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind [a reprobate mind devoid of His spirit, just with the human spirit only], to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, [or controversy] deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,Ē (Romans 1:28-30)
"Without understandingĒ [without understanding, thatís one reason ĎThe Plain Truthíwas named a magazine of understanding. I hoped it would give millions of people someday real understanding. Iím afraid it canít though without the Holy Spirit, even though itís in ĎThe Plain Truthí], Without understanding, covenant-breakers, [that is breaking their contracts or their agreement or their word] without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Romans 1:31-32)
That is the condemnation of God to the people of this world and the knowledge that has developed from the choice that Adam made, and in the colleges and the universities of this world. And I want to tell you that Ambassador College in Pasadena and now the one in Big Sandy stand out as flaming torches, the light of the world and the only institutions I know that do disseminate the true knowledge of God; and an understanding of that knowledge.
Peter closed his letter by saying "but grow in grace". We donít receive all of the Holy Spirit at once, but we must "grow in grace, and the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and forever, Amen." (II Peter 3:18)
So brethren I think we need to understand what kind of knowledge is disseminated in this world. What goes on in the course, no wonder that God or that Christ spoke about the unjust judge. Thereís very little justice in the courts of law of this world, because they donít know right from wrong. And knowing right from wrong is not a test of sanity or insanity at all. And I hope that we come to know that knowledge. And I think now itís about time for the Bible study to end and Iím quitting on time and I going to give you five minutes extra, let you out just five minutes early. And, but I hope that youíve profited from it, I thought that youíd find that film interesting. I donít know whether you could see it very well down there or not. The audio part was a little muffled up here, I hope you heard it. I think you heard some of it because a lot of you laughed at certain portions of it, so you must have understood it. Probably better than I could, Iím a little to close it up here.
So thanks all of you and letís have a wonderful Sabbath now tomorrow and I think since I spoke tonight, Iím going to defer tomorrow to some of our ministers from overseas and other nations who are here; that they should speak both in sermons and in sermonettes. And I think they should have the pulpit tomorrow.
Now a week from tonight Iíll be out in Honolulu and Iíll speak on the Sabbath next week to the church in Honolulu and then Ė that is God willing. I hope that I shall. And then from there on to Hong Kong where I have a public meeting and from there on to Bangkok and to meet the king of Thailand who is up in the north of his country right now. And then a meeting, a public meeting in Bangkok and then on to Manila where I have a number of meetings, not only in our church there, but public meetings. Meetings probably before the Rotary Club, the Knights of Columbus, and the Daughters of Isabella, the Catholic group. And Iíve spoken to them before and they seem to enjoy very much the message and Iím glad that even Catholics are willing to listen to Godís message. And one of the universities and at one of the agricultural departments of the government where they, they brought out four hundred of their people and wanted me to speak to them the last time I was there about a year ago; and then one meeting of ĎPlain Truthí readers in Tokyo and then on back home. And so then, I will not be with you for about three weeks.
Hope to do a couple more telecasts between now and the time we leave on the trip so that the program will be keeping on the air.
So now, so I donít talk overtime, I say good night everybody. Thank you all for listening.