To the Remnant

Changing Halloween Traditions

When I taught ESL (to adults), one of the things I liked to spend at least a few minutes on as they rolled around every year were American holidays. Most holidays are fairly simple to describe and explain, but Halloween is not one of them. I tried a couple of times to look at the history of it with my students, but I eventually just focused on Halloween traditions, especially trick-or-treating, as this was something that would directly affect them. We talked about things like costumes (including masks), jack-o’-lanterns, handing out candy (or not), and the symbolism of the colors orange and black. I also told them about my own family’s Halloween tradition; more on that later.

As I have thought about Halloween over the years, the one overriding, pervasive theme of it has been fear, which is often reflected in Halloween costumes. This in turn has caused me to reflect on the depiction of monsters throughout the history of cinema, which strongly influences costumes. I used to watch vampire movies, and I have come to realize that the depiction of them has changed rather dramatically over the years. In Dracula (Bela Lugosi, 1931), Horror of Dracula (Christopher Lee, 1958), and Bram Stoker’s Dracula (Jack Palance, 1974), the vampire is portrayed as an evil creature who must be (and is) destroyed. This continued in 1979 with Salem’s Lot, a miniseries. However, also in 1979, there was a remarkable change in the movie Dracula (Frank Langella); he is romanticized (quite literally), and whether he is actually destroyed or not at the end of the movie is ambiguous. Jumping ahead to 1994, Interview with the Vampire also romanticizes the creatures; furthermore, they are not destroyed, although others are. I mention all of these specific titles because I have seen them, I’m not proud to say, and I don’t recommend them; after Interview, I stopped watching vampire movies. However, I’m well aware of the Twilight series of movies (2008-2012) and the strong romanticism of the creatures in them. I find this evolution of vampires in cinema to be disturbing. On the one hand, the earlier monsters were scarier (and often ugly), but at least they were portrayed as evil that was to be destroyed. The more-current monsters, on the other hand, are often portrayed as very attractive, romantic, and not necessarily evil. I’m not very familiar with movies and shows about witches (which is just as well), but compare the wicked witch of the west in The Wizard of Oz (1939) with the witches in the original Charmed TV series (1998-2006). Based on what I see online about these three witches all being “good” witches, you can see a similar change in portrayal. The current Hocus Pocus 2 is listed as a “comedy” for “kids and family,” which also tells you something.

When I think about Halloween traditions, I have also noticed a dramatic change. When I was a boy in the 1960s, only elementary-school and younger kids trick-or-treated in my community. Jumping to the early 1990s, after being overseas for a few years, my wife and I returned to the U.S. One thing we noticed was that trick-or-treating had expanded to include teens. In addition, we began to hear about Halloween parties for adults. Costumes were becoming more sophisticated. While little kids wore very cute costumes, some teen costumes were becoming scarier. In some cases, costumes were even sexualized, especially for adults, but also some teens. I certainly don’t see a one-to-one correspondence between the changing portrayal of vampires (and witches) in cinema and changing Halloween costumes and traditions, but there are some striking similarities.

With all that said: What’s a Christian to do on Halloween? I have known brothers and sisters who refuse to participate in any way; they keep their outdoor lights off and either stay home or go elsewhere. Some churches have “Alternative Halloween Parties” or “Fall Festivals.” Some believers participate very “normally” by taking their younger kids trick-or-treating. Some believers hang out in their front yards and play Christian music, serve food (besides candy!), or get even more creative. Many years ago when our kids were little, my wife and I decided that we wanted to get the Gospel out in some way to all of these kids coming to our door. While one of us took our own kids trick-or-treating (my wife was very creative with their costumes), the other stayed home. We had decided to write up a message and attach it to each piece of candy that we handed out. Here are a few examples of messages that we have written over the years:

For many people, Halloween is a time to fear. Witches, ghosts, and the like may be fun, but at the same time they can cause fear. But the Lord says to those who know Him, “Don’t fear because I am with you and will guide you.” Have a fun–and fearless–Halloween.
Since the events of Sept. 11, many people in our country have been scared. Halloween has also traditionally been a scary holiday. However, if you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, you have nothing to fear. “Perfect love drives out fear.” (I John 4:18) Have a fun and fearless Halloween.
Many changes are taking place in our country and in the rest of the world. This has caused some people to be afraid. If you believe in Jesus Christ, however, you have no reason to fear. Have a fun, fearless Halloween.
“Taste and see that the Lord is good.” (Psalm 34: 8 in the Bible)

Our young trick-or-treaters arrive first and don’t care about the messages, of course. However, we usually have a pretty good number of teens a little later. Some of them (even in groups) stop to read the messages before they continue on their way. Our 9/11 message resonated with at least one teen, who the following year told us that it had meant a lot to him. One year, a teen said, “Hey, we remember you; you’re the guys who hand out the cool messages!”

It is not my intention to criticize Christians who choose not to interact with their community on Halloween night. Each person/family needs to decide before the Lord what they are going to do. Speaking of: I’d be especially interested in knowing what you choose to do on this holiday. Regardless, have a fun–and especially fearless–Halloween!

A Tale of Three Churches

I recently had conversations with two brothers from another church in my community about the lockdowns during COVID, specifically regarding church closures in our state (California). This caused me to think more about the responses of their church, my own church, and another church (also in our community) to the lockdown directives. To begin with, let me present brief narratives about each church’s response to the governor’s changing directives.

The church that my two brothers are a part of (now about 500) initially locked down in March of 2020 for a few weeks and then reopened. However, after a few more weeks, they locked down again. Then they decided to meet outdoors (on the church property), but by then, morning temperatures were in the 50s, so after a few more weeks, they decided to move indoors, to a different building on the church “campus,” but with the doors open. While initially an improvement, by this time, it was getting even colder outside, so the indoor temperature was still cold, especially since they didn’t turn on the heat (to save money?); this continued for about five months. Eventually, in late March of 2021, the church returned to “normal.” Throughout the duration, and continuing today, the church has been livestreaming its services. Small groups met sporadically during the yo-yo year, some online, and others in people’s backyards.
My own church (70+) locked down in March of 2020 and stayed that way until July of 2021, when we reopened. Throughout the duration, and continuing today, my church has been livestreaming its services. Our small groups (for all ages) met very regularly throughout the lockdown and have continued to do so. Since reopening, we have expanded our Sunday mornings to include Sunday school.
The third church (~3000, just now reported to me) locked down in March of 2020 and reopened about four months later, in July. At the first service after reopening, the pastor told the congregation that they shouldn’t have closed in the first place and that they would never close again. They continue to livestream their services, and they have plenty of small groups.

My intention is not to try to say which of these three churches did the “best” and which did the “worst.” I’m sure that different people reading this would respond very differently in that regard. However, regarding the first church, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention a couple of things. First of all, one of the brothers, who is a deacon, admitted that in hindsight, maybe they should have never locked down in the first place. The other brother expressed a lot of frustration about the church’s lockdown. He is older, and his family is not comfortable using technology; as a result, he felt isolated during the lockdown. His primary means of connecting with other believers was via telephone, which he did plenty of (including with me), but he sorely missed being face-to-face with other believers. He said that his sentiments were echoed by other older people in the church. My own church, in contrast, had regular small-group meetings throughout the lockdown. Also, because we are a small church, we were able to make sure that all of our members were taken care of. The deaconess in charge of our caring ministry contacted our elderly members, especially, on a very regular basis, making sure their various needs were met, including with technology. However, my frustrated brother from Church #1 reported to me that neither he nor any other elderly members that he was talking to had received a phone call from the church leadership during the first six months of lockdown.

This is not a “political” blog, but I would also be remiss if I didn’t say something about Governor Gavin Newsom’s lockdown directives. When you allow strip clubs, casinos, and “recreational cannabis dispensaries” to remain open because they are deemed to be providing “essential services,” but you lock down churches… need I say more?

There are two Scriptures that I noticed coming up again and again during COVID in relation to the church lockdown directives. One of them is Romans 13:1-2, which tells us, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.” The second Scripture is Hebrews 10:25, which tells us, “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another–and all the more as you see the Day approaching.” Throughout the pandemic, churches had to make their decisions, as they always should, on Scripture.

Church #1 seems to have been influenced more by Romans 13:1-2 than by Hebrews 10:25.

Church #2, my own church, may seem on the surface to have been influenced more by the Romans verses as well. However, every Sunday morning after the benediction, people could stay on Zoom and talk for a while. More significantly, as I mentioned earlier, all of our small groups, for all ages, continued throughout the lockdown without interruption. For myself and my wife, our couples’ Friday night Zoom gatherings were (and still are) incredible times of true koinonia. Our church also sometimes had outdoor social gatherings during COVID. So, did we “give up meeting together?” Only if you narrowly interpret this to mean being together regularly in person; we had very regular, blessed times of seeing each other face to face via Zoom. While I would have preferred to remain in person throughout COVID, I respect my church leaders’ decision.

Church #3 boldly made the decision to resume meeting in person after just a few months; remember also that the pastor said they shouldn’t have closed in the first place. They were clearly influenced primarily by Hebrews 10:25. In other words, they decided that it overrode Romans 13:1-2 because the governor had issued a directive that went against the Biblical directive to meet together; furthermore, he had allowed some “essential services” that promoted sinful behavior to remain open. It was, in essence, an act of civil disobedience.

Looking ahead, as I’ve mentioned before in a couple of previous posts, I believe more plagues will be coming. I hope that our political leaders will not be so foolish as to institute lockdowns again; I don’t think Americans would put up with such a devastating policy next time. If you’re interested in why I think the lockdowns were wrong, you can look at a Johns Hopkins study that came out in early February of this year, or you can just click here: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2022/02/09/how-effective-were-the-lockdowns/

Conversations about Other Beliefs

I was born in 1960 and grew up in a monolithic belief system. My father was a pastor in a small town (~600 people) where many people attended church, as did farmers who lived nearby. Even among people who didn’t, it seemed that most of them had an underlying, unspoken respect for the Bible, even if they didn’t read it themselves or know what it said. Having known people from many other places throughout the U.S., as well as having lived in some of them, I think that was probably true throughout large swaths of the country. In addition to my being raised in a Christian family and church, I attended Christian schools, including college. When I was 20, I finally understood that the Lord was a deeply personal God Who cared for me, and I became a Christian. Right about that time, I also began to encounter people who did not share my beliefs but who I became friends with.

One of my earliest conversations with someone who had a very different background than me was when I spent the summer working at an azalea nursery, where there were several workers from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. Eth was a young guy that I worked with and enjoyed talking with. I don’t remember how we got onto the topic of religion, but I told him that I attended church and was a Christian; he said that he was a Buddhist and that in Cambodia, he had gone to a temple. We would “trash-talk” in a friendly guy way about various things. Eth, who smoked and drank some, said things like, “You don’t smoke, don’t drink; good boy.” Eventually, I tried to persuade him about some fundamental Christian beliefs, but he just said that all religions helped people to be “good.” I don’t know whatever happened to Eth, but I pray for him whenever I think of him, like now.

As a graduate student, I attended a secular university and met many people from all kinds of backgrounds, including religiously. I didn’t have a lot of comparative-religion conversations in terms of beliefs, but primarily in terms of practices and food. (Speaking of: one of my fondest memories of my time back then is eating delicious gyros with guys from Yemen in a dorm room!) One person who I got to know especially well was Keiko, from Japan; we had some conversations about Christianity, Shintoism, and Buddhism, although she herself did not identify as a follower of any particular religion. Keiko is another person I pray for when she comes to mind.

At the beginning of my teaching career, I taught in a communist Third World country where most of my students were atheists. Throughout my–and later our (with my wife)–five years there, students would frequently drop in to visit in the evening, some of them with religious questions. Some were sincere, while others were somewhat mocking, but over the years, we saw several come to faith in Christ, including some of the previous mockers! Some of them, we didn’t find out about until years later.

Since coming back to the U.S. thirty years ago, now and then I have had opportunities to talk about the Lord to people who have other beliefs. One person who stands out is a colleague from Vietnam named Trang. I was a mentor of sorts to her, but in addition to conversations about teaching, we had other conversations as well, including about Christianity and Buddhism. We never argued, but rather enjoyed the conversations. Trang is yet another person I pray for when she comes to mind. Another person who stands out is a student from an atheist background who had written about her purpose in life and came to my office; she wanted to pray to accept Jesus, so I prayed with her. When I told a colleague who was at least ostensibly a Christian about this, I’m sorry to say that she cautioned me; she didn’t think it was “appropriate.” I pray for both of them when I think of them.

Last year, following my COVID vaccination, I had “frozen shoulder,” so my doctor recommended physical therapy. Although I was initially somewhat skeptical, I noticed as the weeks went by that my shoulder was showing definite improvement. (It is almost completely back to normal now.) There were five different therapists who worked with me, and I quickly discovered that one of them was a Christian. One day, she asked me, “Do you think that Jesus is the only way to heaven?” I quoted Jesus’ words in John 14:6: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” We talked a bit further about this, and we agreed that followers of other religions would not go to heaven. I noticed that one of my other therapists was listening very intently; in fact, I think that my sister in Christ asked that question at least partly because she wanted the other therapist to (over)hear our conversation! As with the other people I have mentioned, I pray for her when she comes to mind.

I have been reading a book recommended to our small group by one of my brothers in Christ; it gives a brief summary of the beliefs of other religions, sects, and worldviews. While I think this knowledge is certainly helpful, as I have reflected on the conversations I have had throughout the decades with adherents of other beliefs, I realize that while sometimes I have offered “rebuttals” to other people, many times I have not. For the most part, they and I have enjoyed such conversations. And in some cases, they have eventually come to faith in Christ. However you and I may communicate with people of varying belief systems, my prayer is that we would always do so with grace and truth; we can trust the Lord for the results, whatever they may be.

Watch Your Language!

It has been my impression over the years that foul language of various kinds has been increasing, especially among younger generations. A couple of recent incidents–one I overheard that was profoundly wonderful and another that I heard about on the news that was profoundly disturbing–prompted me to research the use of profanity and people’s attitudes toward it.

First of all, I should mention that not everyone considers the same words taboo, vulgar, foul, obscene, or profane (these words are roughly synonyms, and throughout this post, I use them interchangeably). My intention is not to attempt to parse which words virtually everyone is likely to consider taboo, but to first of all look at some age and gender differences in regard to the usage of them. In my research, I found a couple of good articles from 2006 about some gender and age differences in the U.S. As you might guess, younger Americans (ages 18-34) were significantly more prone to swearing in conversation than Americans 35 and older, 62% to 39%. Additionally, men were more likely to swear than women, 54% to 39%. I also found an article from 2016 which said that American women and men use the F-word almost equally. Beyond that, I’ve had difficulty finding other articles about swearing written for the general public since 2006. My guess is that this is due at least in part to the heavy use of social media for people’s communication, making the gathering of data more complicated. On the one hand, there is a lot of written text that could be analyzed; on the other hand, previous research focused on speaking. I did find in an article from last year that the average American says 80-90 curse words every day.

I was able to find some much-more-recent articles about swearing in the U.K., including one from last year. One statistic that I found especially interesting was that 46% of Generation Zs said they frequently use strong language. That compares with 12% for people aged 55-64. As for gender: Women now use the F-word more than men! I also found an article from 2015 that says the British are more “proficient” at swearing than Americans, with more creativity. My strong guess is that the significant U.K. generational divide in regard to swearing is also present in the U.S., based on what I overhear. I don’t have a good guess regarding gender differences in the U.S., especially among youth.

While generational and gender differences in swearing are interesting, more important than these differences is the question of how we respond to swearing. First of all, most parents still agree, thankfully (including in the U.K.), that they don’t want their kids to use foul language. Of course, that means that parents have to watch their own language! Beyond parenting, however, how do or should we respond? When I was a grad student many years ago, I had a great linguistics professor. There was only one problem; he peppered his lectures with vulgar language. A couple of my female classmates from Asia came to me after class one day and said that they were bothered by some of the words that the professor used; I agreed and said that we should go talk to him. They looked uncomfortably at each other and then explained that they would like just me to do it! I agreed and paid our professor an office visit. He explained to me that when he used certain words, that he didn’t really mean them. In other words, when he said “s–t,” for example, he didn’t mean that “stuff.” I explained that that word (and some others) were offensive to me and some of my classmates. While he didn’t agree to limit his use of vulgarity, we noticed an immediate change the next day! He didn’t completely eliminate the use of such words, but the frequency was considerably less. In addition, the following year I took another class with him, and he used virtually no vulgarity.

I’m a retired ESL teacher, and my students never used obscene language during class; during breaks, they usually talked in their first language. However, I sometimes heard obscene language elsewhere on campus; there was one time I remember where I told a couple of guys to watch their language. In my neighborhood, sometimes when people walk by, I hear swearing, usually the F-word, and usually by young guys, sometimes even kids. I tolerate it because they are passersby.

In that regard: at the outset of this post, I mentioned something I had recently overheard that was profoundly wonderful. There were three boys riding their bikes by my house, and here’s what I heard:

1st boy: “Hey, what the [F-word]!”
2nd boy: “Don’t cuss. That’s bad.”
3rd boy: “It’s a sin. I should tell your mom.”

I almost called out something like, “You don’t need to tell his mom; you guys told him! He needed to hear it from you!” However, thankfully, I kept my mouth shut and praised the Lord in my heart. This is the best kind of “policing” of language, friend(s)-to-friend.

Contrast this with a video clip I saw on the news in July. The incident, which happened in St. Paul, MN, shows a very young boy wearing only underwear who screams, “Shut up, b—h!” at a police officer. He then walks up to the officer, hits him, and repeats his obscenity. Following that, he screams “Shut the f–k up!” at the other officer and adds that his work boots are “those ugly-ass church shoes.” The boy goes on to hit one of them at least three more times, even as the officers, who remain calm throughout, start walking away. As if things couldn’t have been worse, there is another even younger boy in a diaper with the boy who’s swearing and hitting; a bit later, he joins the older boy in even throwing rocks at the officers as they’re walking away. Adding insult to injury, a bystander can be heard encouraging the boys and calling out that one of the officers is an “Oreo head,” a slur suggesting a black person is acting white.

I’m so thankful to the Lord for allowing me to hear the wonderful exchange between the three bike-riding boys in front of my house, which happened very recently; after the profoundly disturbing video footage the previous month of the young boy swearing at the cop and hitting him, I needed that.

Speaking of the Lord: what does the Bible have to say about swearing? First of all, we have the fourth commandment in Exodus 20:7, which says, “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses His name.” This commandment, which is repeated verbatim in Deuteronomy 5:11, refers specifically to misusing God’s Name; I certainly hear that at times in various forms, I’m sorry to say. Beyond that kind of swearing, Ephesians 4:29 says this: “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.” The phrase “unwholesome talk” certainly goes beyond taboo words, but it includes them. A few verses later, in Ephesians 5:4, we read this: “Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving.” For good measure, here’s Colossians 3:8: “But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.”

As Christians, let’s watch our language! The Lord is not pleased with obscenity in any form, and neither, thankfully, are many people, whether they tell us (verbally or non-verbally) or not.

Changing Language, Changing Perceptions

Euphemisms are a common, indirect way to refer to something that many people would consider unpleasant or embarrassing. For example, unemployed people might say that they are “between jobs.” Another euphemism that I recently came across for unemployment that made me laugh is “embarking on a journey of self-discovery.” A common euphemism for a past-due bill is an “outstanding payment,” which also makes me laugh. “Outstanding,” really?!

Some euphemisms, on the other hand, are not so amusing but are deliberately designed to throw a positive spin on something controversial, to say the least. One euphemism that has come into vogue fairly recently is “gender-affirming care.” This does not refer to providing care to someone based on their biological sex, but to whatever gender they identify with on a given day. More specifically, it encompasses helping someone, including (especially?) children, transition from their biological sex to the opposite sex. I’ve written about this in a previous post, but there are four stages in transitioning: social, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and sex reassignment surgery. The fourth stage could be referred to in other not-so-euphemistic ways, such as “genital mutilation.” However, the various powers that be are of course not going to use such a pejorative phrase.

Another example, which has been in common usage for so long that people no longer think of it as a euphemism, is “pro-choice.” This is much more palatable than “pro-abortion,” for example. Admittedly, those on the other side commonly use the phrase “pro-life” rather than “anti-abortion.” In the wake of the Supreme Court decision this summer to turn this issue over to the states, perhaps you’ve seen the sign “Abortion Saves Lives” at protests. Just stop and think about that for a moment!

Another issue having to do with life and death is euthanasia. I remember in the 1980s when I was in college, euthanasia was referred to as “mercy killing.” However, that didn’t last, of course, and now it is commonly referred to as the much-more-pleasant-sounding “Death with Dignity.” I have written about end-of-life issues in a previous post; click here if you’re interested: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2020/10/22/when-is-it-right-to-die/

In the economic sphere, an example of trying to throw a positive spin on something is the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act. After its passage (but not before), even CNN and MSNBC admitted that this act would have a negligible effect on lowering inflation, echoing what the Congressional Budget Office had said. If you do the math, you will discover that 84.4% of the so-called Inflation Reduction Act is for “energy security and climate change.” What that means is basically “let’s go green.” This is not the place for me to go into detail about energy sources, but it’s obvious that the current administration is not in favor of either fossil fuels or nuclear energy. Is it wise to put essentially all of your eggs in one energy basket? But I digress. Back to the main point, which is that the “Inflation Reduction Act” will not lower the rate of inflation!

Another recent example in the economic sphere of trying to obfuscate facts is the term “recession,” which has been commonly understood for several decades as two consecutive quarters of negative GDP (Gross Domestic Product). However, the current administration has refused to concede that the U.S. is in a recession. How much better would it be just to admit it and then to state something like, “We are working to re-energize the U.S. economy?”

Another area where those in power try to put a positive spin on a phenomenon is violence. During the riots two years ago in the wake of George Floyd’s death, there were two what I regard as particularly seminal moments. The first one was on May 29, 2020, when an MSNBC reporter, standing in front of a burning building in Minneapolis, said, “This is mostly a protest. It is not generally speaking unruly.” Three months later, following the shooting death of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, a CNN reporter, standing in front of a raging fire, was reporting on what was happening. At the bottom of the screen was the caption “Fiery But Mostly Peaceful Protests After Police Shooting.” Both MSNBC and CNN were widely mocked, and rightly so, for referring to these riots as “protests,” while adding fuel to the mockery fire with the words “not…unruly” and “mostly peaceful.”

Compare those 2020 riots with the peaceful, albeit sometimes vociferous, protests at school-board meetings by parents in 2021. The NSBA (National School Boards Association) wrote a letter to the Biden administration including the following: “As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.” The fact is, there have been some threats (mostly not at the school-board meetings but in letters), but no violence. The NSBA later apologized for the letter, but the damage was done. This characterization of words as “violence” is in keeping with the growing tendency on university campuses to refer to ideas that you disagree with as “violence.” Just to reiterate, during the summer of 2020 riots, there were plenty of acts of violence, including the aforementioned fires, but also violent looting and murders.

I’m sorry to say that even among pastors, I’ve noticed a word change that I think is significant. Have you heard the word “sin” lately? Thankfully, in the church that my wife and I are now a part of, our pastor is not afraid to use this word. However, at a previous church, it had been a long time since I’d heard it; the same is true with some, but thankfully not all, other pastors that I’ve heard and read. A common substitute is “mistake” or “wrong choice.” Let’s be clear: our sin is abhorrent to our holy God; that’s why Jesus died for us!

Thankfully, even as the powers that be, including some pastors, sometimes use euphemistic and obfuscating language, this is what the Lord tells us in Isaiah 40:6: “All men are like grass.” Two verses later, we are told, “The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the Word of our God stands forever.” The apostle Peter also quotes these words in 1 Peter 1:24-25. Yes, even as the world around us continues to change at lightning speed, including language, the Word of God stands forever, unchanging. We can always trust the Lord and His Word.