I am in the process of moving out of my apartment and into a house I just bought.  It's well before my lease is up, and my landlord will not let me break the lease.  Because of this, I have been advertising to find someone to sublet the apartment from me.  An unmarried couple is interested in the apartment, and they appear to be planning to live together.  If I were to sublet to them, would I be sinning by enabling this unscriptural living arrangement?

Furthermore, I haven't been able to find a clear answer, but it seems that discriminating based on being an unmarried couple living together may be illegal under the Fair Housing Act.  If this is the case, how should it factor into my decision?

Sincerely,
Landlord?

Dear Landlord,

These are the type of predicaments that test our wisdom and personal judgment.  On the one hand, the argument can be made that you are not causing them to live in sin, and they would just live somewhere else if you don’t sublet your apartment to them.  On the other hand, it is very easy to come to the conclusion that you are yoking yourself to an ungodly lifestyle (2 Cor 6:14).  In short, we would not be too quick to judge another christian’s decision in this area.

However, we can say that it would be impossible for us to sublet this apartment in good conscience if it were our decision, and anything not done in faith is sin (Rom 14:23).  Furthermore, if something becomes an issue of morality, then that supersedes any legal issues.  We must always obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29).  The cons of this situation seem to far outweigh the pros.  This couple is openly living an ungodly lifestyle, which sets you up for a potentially damaging relationship as per 2 Cor 6:14-18.  Not only are they harming themselves, but there is a good chance that subletting to them will harm you as well.

    I realize it is becoming more politically correct for our nation to take the word "Christmas" out of the holidays (like the governor of Rhode Island calling the tree at the capital a "holiday" tree).  Since we don't celebrate Christ during the holidays as a church, would it be better for me to be in favor with the secularization of the holidays, or should I defend "Christmas" because removing the name is an attack on faith in Christ in general?  I am really confused where I should stand on this issue as a Christian.  I don't celebrate Christ at Christmas time, but I really dislike the attack on religion.  Please help.

Sincerely,
Mixed Feelings

Dear Mixed Feelings,

We here at AYP really feel your pain on this issue.  On the one hand, Christmas is not a biblical holiday (read “A Silent Summer Night” for more details on this issue), but on the other hand, we hate to see the constant attack upon the religious freedoms we enjoy in the United States.  The best way we can find to handle the issue is to be clear on both points.

1. You don’t personally celebrate Christmas as a religious holiday.
2. You have a problem with those who want to remove “Christ” from Christmas because of their hatred for Christianity.

Standing by the truth is always harder than just picking one of the popular positions, but in the end, we think it makes an even stronger case when someone who doesn’t personally celebrate Christmas as a spiritual holiday still respects the name of Christ enough to oppose those who fight against it in any arena.

Does God have a sense of humor?

Sincerely,
Chuckles

Dear Chuckles, 

God definitely has a sense of humor, but just as a child often struggles to see his parents’ funny bone because they are busy raising the child, we often miss God’s sense of humor because we are His children and the works of His hands (1 Jn 3:1).  One of the simplest proofs of God’s ability to find humor is that we are made in His image (Gen 1:27), and we are able to laugh.  Since man has a sense of humor, God must have one also.

Ps 59:8 talks about God laughing at those who think they can outwit Him, and Ps 2:4 says the same.  There are other things that point to God’s sense of humor.  When we look at the animals and created world, we see the invisible attributes of God (Rom 1:20).  God made the platypus – that animal is downright hilarious-looking!

Lastly, there are other anecdotes in the Bible that show God’s sense of humor: the way He destroys the false god, Dagon, in 1 Sam 5:1-5 or how the false exorcists were put to flight in Acts 19:13-16.

     Our preacher recently gave a sermon on drinking, and he said that even the smallest amount of alcohol consumption is sin.  After the sermon, he was asked if rinsing with mouthwash containing alcohol (of which slight molecules of alcohol are ingested through absorption into the tissues) was also sin.  He did not want to contradict his previous statement that one drink was “one drink drunk” and, subsequently, condemned the use of alcohol mouthwash.  Is this an example of reductio ad absurdum?

Sincerely,
Incredulous

Dear Incredulous,

It is obvious from how you wrote your question that you believe it is an example of reduction to absurdity, and in this case, we agree.  We won’t address your preacher’s point of view on drinking; let’s just look at what the Bible says.

1 Tim 5:23 states that medicinal use of alcohol is perfectly permissible – mouthwash would fit into that category.  The problem with the alcohol question is that God never specifically condemns all alcoholic beverages.  However, He does condemn ‘strong drink’ (Pr 20:1), drinking parties (1 Pet 4:3), and drunkenness (Rom 13:13).  Almost all alcohol that is consumed today would fall into the category of ‘strong drink’ because our alcoholic beverages are artificially fermented to increase their alcoholic content (unlike the wine of Jesus’ day – read “That’s Just Grape” for further details on the wine Jesus drank).  At the end of the day, we would all do well to heed the words of Pr 23:31-32 and avoid alcohol as much as is possible.

I have heard many stories of people that have been declared legally dead for a few minutes and have "seen the light" or gotten a glimpse of what heaven or hell may be like.  Is this possible?

Sincerely,
Walk Towards The Light

Dear Walk Towards The Light,

‘Legally dead’ is not the same as actually dead.  A hundred years ago, someone was declared legally dead when they stopped breathing.  Fifty years ago, someone was declared legally dead when their heart stopped beating.  Today, we know that neither of those things necessarily mean that someone is dead.  In truth, the only way to know for sure that someone is “fully dead” is when they don’t come back to life.  When someone is declared dead and then are resuscitated, it simply means the physicians made a mistake in deeming the person “too far gone”.

The whole point of that explanation is to say that you only go to heaven or hell when you are actually dead.  The rich man wanted to get back to his brothers and explain what was on the other side… but he couldn’t (Lk 16:22-31).  Furthermore, God makes it clear that each of us only dies once, and only then will we face the Judgment (Heb 9:27).  Anyone who says they have visited heaven (no matter how sincere their assertion) is mistaken.