Reacting to Guilt

People have different ways of dealing with their ugly past. Some believe that they must go and apologize to all those who were hurt by their past poor choices. Others think they must do something to ‘make it up to’ the ones they’ve hurt. Still others imagine that a life devoted to good works will somehow offset the dark deeds of their past.

These are good responses, but they are ultimately only reactions that may temporarily pacify one’s guilt. Yes, that is the focus...guilt!

The problem with guilt is that there is no ‘undo.’ A person simply cannot reverse life and undo the past. An apology is a kind and relevant gesture, yet it does not take away the wrong done. Serving someone you've hurt is a kind gesture, but it does not erase the hurt. A life of service is admirable, but the past remains.

I think we intuitively understand this, and it frustrates us.

Think about the apostle Paul...before he was an apostle, when he was known as Saul. He had great zeal for God, but it was misplaced; he was a persecutor of Christians. God capitalized on Saul’s zeal thorough a blinding confrontation. Saul was on a trip to the city of Damascus. He held papers from the Jewish leaders authorizing him to search out anyone “belonging to the Way” so he could imprison them.

A light from heaven flashed around Saul (blinding him), and a voice said, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” Saul inquired, “Who are You, Lord?” The voice came back, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting.”

In the course of three days Saul was allowed to think things over and he made a complete turnaround giving his allegiance to Jesus Christ. He regained his sight and from then on, he “proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, ‘He is the Son of God.’” (Read his conversion story in Acts 9.)

How did Saul/Paul deal with his past...the persecutions…his guilt!? Here are three things he did not do that would be endorsed by many today:

• He might have made some personal apologies, but he did not go on a crusade to apologize to everyone he had hurt.
• He did not try to ‘make it up to’ the church for all his persecutions.
• He did not devote himself to making ___X___ number of conversions.

Paul did not try to pacify his guilt. He turned to Jesus and received forgiveness...from God. Then, he simply devoted himself to God.

King David had it right in his beautiful confession and plea to God after having committed adultery and murder: “Against You, You only, I have sinned and done what is evil in Your sight.”

David had taken advantage of Bathsheba by committing adultery with her. He had her husband killed to cover up their sin. He had shamed Israel. Paul had physically harmed Christians, had terrified the church of God, and undoubtedly persuaded some to avoid Christianity. And yet, both David and Paul first sinned against God. Bathsheba and her husband were not the standard of holiness. Christians are not the standard of righteousness. God is holy; He is righteous. All sin is first against God.

Paul summed up his quest after having become a Christian: “I want to know Christ.” His was not a quest to undo or repair the past, but to move forward. He knew, just as you and I know, there is no ‘undo.’

For that reason, our only response is to fall at the feet of Jesus and plead for mercy. Once we have received God’s forgiveness thorough the atoning sacrifice of Jesus, we then devote our lives to Christ: “I want to know Christ!”

Mark Stinnett

October 26, 2025

What is the Value of a Clear Conscience?

(The Conscience, Part 3)

You may be familiar with the old west humor where the gunslinger bellies up to the saloon bar after a gunfight and growls loudly, “Well, he needed a good killin’.” It is a somewhat humorous way of justifying the death of the other gunman lying in the street.

Whatever you may think of my silly illustration, focus on the word ‘justify.’ To justify something is to make it ‘right.’ Now, look a little closer. Why would anyone need to make something right?

I’m sure you see it. More accurately, justification is making something that is perceived to be wrong to appear to be right. The gunslinger justified murder by claiming that the other man needed (deserved) death.

It is likely that we have all tried to justify something, though not as serious as murder!

Have you ever lied, but felt like it was the right thing to do in your specific circumstances? You don’t generally lie. But on that occasion, it seemed necessary.

You might have justified your lie by telling yourself that it was for a good reason. If you had told the truth, a friend would have suffered in some way. Or, perhaps your lie saved you a significant amount of money. After all, that organization is well off (or corrupt or undeserving or abusive…) and they would never miss the small amount that you kept from them.

Whenever we justify a wrong we must understand that it is still wrong. The proof of our wrongdoing is our perceived need to justify ourselves. In other words, if it was not perceived to be wrong, then why would we feel the need to explain (justify) ourselves?

Why do you think it is so important for people to justify themselves?

The human conscience is a built in judge and jury that deals with moral issues. Whenever the conscience disapproves of an action it assigns guilt. In the case of lying, the conscience knows that lying is wrong. So, it acts as a jury and renders a ’guilty’ verdict. (We try to avoid guilt.)

Solomon made this observation:

People do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his appetite when he is hungry, but if he is caught, he will pay sevenfold; he will give all the goods of his house.
--Proverbs 6:30–31 (ESV)

The simple point is that people may be understanding or even find it easy to justify a moral wrong, but it is still wrong.

Justification is made to soothe the guilty conscience. It does not take away the wrong, but it explains the wrong so that can be said, “My conscience is clear.” The guilt has been removed by justification, but in reality, only the guilt feelings are removed. Yet, as with the hungry thief, true guilt remains. So, self-justification masks guilt by renaming wrong as right. For that reason, a clear conscience is worthless.

Some modern translations of the Bible refer to a clear conscience. However, in every one of those cases the Greek text describes the conscience as: good, clean, pure, blameless or perfect (complete), never clear.

A clear conscience is an unreliable moral judge. It could result from following a good conscience or justifying an evil conscience.

God is not interested in you having a clear conscience without first obtaining a clean conscience. He does not want you to justify your guilty conscience, but follow a pure conscience. 

Is your conscience clear or is it clean?

Mark Stinnett

October 28, 2019

Why Were You Baptized? (Reason #4)

The reason for baptism that I wish to address today might be generalized:

Reason #4: External pressure.

A young lady sat across my desk from me and broke into tears when I asked the simple question, “Why were you baptized?”

She regained her composure enough to answer, “All my friends were getting baptized, so I did too. I didn’t know what I was doing.”

I spoke with a wife who wondered about her husband’s motive when he was baptized. One thing was certain, her father would not allow the two to marry unless the young man was baptized. Questions lingered.

I have heard it taught that we just need to be obedient, "Be baptized." As a result some have felt pressured into going through a baptism ritual as an act of obedience. Yet, there is much more to baptism than an arbitrary command: "Be baptized!"

Related to that, “If you aren’t baptized you’ll go to hell.” Or, at church camp, “If you haven’t been baptized yet, you won’t be saved.”

All of these examples have one thing in common: Some degree of external pressure.

Let me quickly add; I am sure that the crowd that heard the first gospel sermon on the Day of Pentecost felt pressure. (Read Acts 2.) Having been cut to the heart, they interrupted Peter’s sermon: “What shall we do?” However, the pressure they felt was related to an inner conviction brought about by the gospel message. That is the right kind of pressure.

I am more concerned about external pressure that is not rooted in the gospel message. The problem is an insufficient understanding of the reason for baptism. Sometimes it is the fault of the preacher/teacher, and sometimes the fault of the listener.

Some preachers have pressured people into baptism by using high-pressure sales techniques or by using guilt to manipulate. Paul was on fire for the gospel, but he did not coerce people; no belt-notching, baptism boasting for Paul.

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.    —1 Corinthians 1:17

In the New Testament baptism was always a faith response, not the mere observance of a ritual act. Anyone can participate in a ritual without understanding (e.g. Latin Mass for English-speaking people). However, a faith response is, by nature, a conviction of the heart based on understanding.

If you were baptized just to follow the crowd or to please someone, your baptism lacks meaning and substance. You should rethink your reason for being baptized in light of biblical teaching.

If you were pressured into baptized as an act of obedience to a legal command, you really missed the point of baptism. You desperately need to turn to the scriptures and reevaluate.

Baptism is not a magic shield against God’s wrath. So, if you were pressured into baptism through fear or through guilt, yet did not understand the biblical teaching on baptism, you also need to turn to the scriptures and reevaluate.

I never want to create doubt in the hearts of people. However, there is but ‘one baptism.’ As believers, we must make sure that we have made a proper faith response to God in baptism. If there is any pressure, it ought to come from God through the gospel message.

Reason #5, next week.