Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

In recent weeks, a lot of attention has been focused upon Anita Bryant’s stand against% homosexuality. Since her stand, a number of prominent political figures have announced their support of her petition. Governor Reubin Askew of Florida urged the repeal of a Dade County (Miami) ordinance guaranteeing equal job opportunities, particularly teaching jobs, to homosexuals. Askew, a Presbyterian and the father of two teen-agars, said he would not want “a known homosexual teaching my children.” He said he had no known homosexuals on his staff and would not accept any.

A number of people do not agree with Askew and Bryant’s stand. Personally, I do. I recognize in America that everyone has certain personal liberties. However, another person’s liberties end when they begin to infringe on my rights. I fear that in our attempt to give every minority group the full extent of its rights, we are neglecting the rights of the majority of Americans. I know that this has happened in the laws which have been passed to protect the criminal. As they now stand, the laws of this land protect the criminal more than they protect his victim.

Yet, someone clamors that I am trying to force a set of moral codes upon someone when I try to keep homosexuals from being teachers. So what? Is it wrong, to demand that school teachers have a moral code or conform to a given moral code? Do we not demand that school teachers not be known as habitual murderers, thieves, arsonists, etc.? Is this not the enforcement of a moral code upon a person? Really, the only question which must be faced is not, “Are we going to enforce a moral code upon someone else?” but which moral code are we going to enforce?”

The moral code which is presently being accepted with reference to homosexuality is “to each his own.” That is, if a person enjoys the homosexual life-style let him live it and let no one try to degrade him for living that style of life. If that moral code works with reference to homosexuality, we should be able to apply it to other ethical problems. If T want to be a thief, lei me be a thief and let no one try to criticize me; if I want to be a murderer, let me be a murderer and let no one criticize me for it; if a woman wants to be a prostitute; let no one criticize her for it and certainly do not arrest her for violating the law. Otherwise, you will be trying to legally enforce a moral code upon the whole society! I think you can see that this would lead to social anarchy.

The charge that you will be guilty of trying to enforce the Christian ethical code upon the whole society is nothing but a smokescreen to cloud an ethical issue which anyone in his right mind knows is both criminal and sinful. It falls into the same category as rape, prostitution, and sexual abuse of children. It should be enforced in the same way.

Some months ago, I saw a program on one of the public television stations in Indianapolis on which three confessed homosexuals tried to defend their sinful behavior. They commented on the trend of modern psychiatry to treat homosexuality as a sickness; the homosexuals rightfully contended that homosexuality was not a sickness. It was something into which each entered of his own volition. The problem which these had, however, was that they would not admit that homosexuality was a sin. They wanted to treat it as an acceptable form of sexual expression. One of the three was a priest from some denomination. He had the audacity to leave the impression that the Bible approved of homosexuality. A more blatant perversion of the Bible cannot be imagined. Here are some of the Bible passages which speak of homosexuality:

“You shall not he with a male as one lies with a female; it is as abomination” (Lev. 18:22).

“If there Is a man who lies with a male as those who He with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them” (Lev. 20:13).

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals . . . shall inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

Personally, I would have more respect for the homosexuals if they would come right out and say that they did not care what the Bible says and that they were going to live how they want to live regardless of what God says than when they dishonestly try to leave the impression that God approves of their homosexuality. My friends, God detests homosexuality and considers the man who practices it as a sinner doomed to hell.

Why is it that homosexuality has increased so much in recent years? Again, I think that the Bible has the answer to this question. The society which has decided to disregard God and walls in its own way is headed down the road to destruction. It will become more and more morally corrupt. This the plain statement of Scripture. Paul said,

“For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God, or glue thanks; but became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the in. corruptible God for an image In the form of corruptible man sad of birds sad four footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over is the lusts of their harts to impurity, that their bodies might be dishonored among them. For they exchanged the truth of God for a He, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them over to degrading passion; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire towards one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error” (Rom. 1:22-27).

Let us examine the steps which led to the sodomy which is condemned in v. 27:

(I) “For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God.” The beginning of the moral degradation into which today’s society has fallen is the repudiation of God’s right to dictate to man the kind of life which he should live. When a society decides to “ban the Bible” and “eliminate prayer,” it has taken the first steps toward moral degradation. We are where we are today because man has decided to no longer worship, adore and obey God Almighty.

(2) “Professing to be wise, they became fools.” Thisis the second step of the road to moral degradation. When God has been removed as the spokesman who determines what is right and what is wrong, man has no objective criterion left by which he can determine what is right and wrong. This is the situation in America today. Our “wise men” are desperately trying to decide what is to be considered pornography and what is not; they are more and more leaning toward legalizing prostitution. Already they have legalized gambling, adultery, and other sins. Man in his wisdom has become a fool!

(3) “God gave them up.” God will only tolerate so much of this kind of conduct before altogether turning his back upon the society which practices it. From the description which is contained in the latter part of Romans 1, I am about to conclude that God has already given America up. The next step is already in progress.

(4) “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions.” The degrading passions are manifest on every hand. Every minute market in America is filled with pornographic literature which features anything from plain nakedness to homosexuality, to sexual abuse of children, to sexual intercourse with animals. The papers in America are filled with advertisements of pornography films. Abortion clinics are even allowed to openly advertise.

And now, homosexuality begins to show itself once again. The pornography, fornication and adultery which are so prevalent in every aspect of modern society is the seed bed which has produced the harvest of homosexuality which we are now experiencing. The degrading passions are already here. Just how much longer God will allow a nation which is so filled with sin to exist is something which bothers me more and more each day. My knowledge of God’s word convinces me that He will not tolerate it forever; soon He will bring judgment against this nation, although the form which it will take is not known to man.

Conclusion

In the meantime, we who are following God’s word must do what we can to live righteously. I remind you that for want of ten righteous souls, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed. We can also try to influence our neighbors to become Christians. But, most of all, we must be careful not to be deceived by the wise men of the world into believing that sins, such as homosexuality, are acceptable forms of sexual expression. So long as we hold on to the authority of God’s word, this will never happen.

Truth Magazine XXI: 36, pp. 563-565
September 15, 1977

By Larry Ray Hafley

“Give me six lines written by an honest man, and I will find something in it with which to hang him” (Cardinal Richelieu, as quoted by Henry Kissinger, who was quoted by James Reston, “The Commercial Appeal,” Memphis, Tennessee, April 17, 1976, p. 6).

The devil walks about seeking whom he may devour. Some read about seeking whom they may hang. It is always proper, even in six lines or less, to point out error, but one must be careful lest envy, jealousy and pride cause him to go mote hunting as per Matt. 7:1-5. The cause of truth and righteousness is too important to be burdened with selfish arrogance and egotism. In controversy, issues must remain primary and basic. A personal vendetta results in a number of negative goals. First, the one in error enlists sympathy. Second, the cause of truth is evil spoken of. Third, the reprover loses his influence for good. Fourth, the rebuker loses his soul.

Men often become so tied to false doctrine that their very name is synonymous with error. There is nothing inherently wrong with marking those who lead away disciples (Rom. 16:17; 2 Tim. 2:16-18; Titus 1:10-13). Judgment and discretion must be used, but to shrink from direct, personal conflict is as inexcusable as the afore mentioned personal vendetta. So what can be done? Keep your heart with all diligence, pray, do your duty toward the truth, hate every false way, and love the souls of men.

Meantime, give me six lines written by a dishonest man, and I will try to find something in them with which to help him.

Truth Magazine XXI: 36, p. 562
September 15, 1977

By Luther Blackmon

I read an article somewhere in which a woman was being given advise on the matter of “holding a husband.” The counsellor’s advise was, “If you want to hold a man you must first set him free.” Sounds paradoxical, but good advice I think. I’m not an expert on such matters, but I think she meant that the best way to hold a man is to let him feel that he is not being “held.”

I read another story, and this one was hypothetical. A man fell over a cliff, and a few feet below the edge he caught a bush that grew out of the side of the cliff. He was terrified and began praying. The story has it that the Lord answered him audibly and said, “What is it you want?” “Save my life,” the man pleaded. “Do you believe that I am able to save you?” the Lord asked. “Oh, yes, I believe.” “What would you be willing to do to show that faith?” asked the Lord. “Anything! Anything at all!” the fellow said. “Then turn loose that bush,” came the answer. This sounds paradoxical, also, but there is illustrated in this story a principle of divine truth. This is particularly apropos of the matter of giving.

We Receive by Giving

In my preaching on giving, I have stopped putting the emphasis on “paying the bills” and “meeting the budget.” I do not mean to minimize the importance of money in the Lord’s work. The more money we have to use, the more work that can be done. But our preaching on giving ought to emphasize the need of the giver more than the need of the money. Paul calls giving a grace (2 Cor. 8:6, 7). Grace is something God does for us, not something we do for Him. And giving our means into the Lord’s work is a favor of the Giver. Why else would the Creator of the world, the Giver of life and the Father of our spirits ask us to give? Does anyone think that God needs our money? Don’t we realize the God could have preached the gospel to the whole world, relieved all the needy and edified all the saints to perfection, without a penny of our money or an effort of any kind on our part if He had chosen to do it that way? What’s the matter with us? When you hear some poor miserable imitation of a Christian complaining about how the church is always needing money, and how the “Bible says charity begins at home,” just tell him to stick his money back into his pocket and save it to buy himself an air-conditioner to take with him when he dies. Because what little he gives would not help the work much and it won’t do him any good at all unless he changes his attitude.

Paul not only says that giving is a “grace,” but that “God is able to make all grace abound towards you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may bound unto every good work . . . . now he that ministereth seed for the sower both minister bread for your food and multiply your seed sown and Increase the fruits of your righteousness” (2 Cor. 9:8, 10).

This simply says that if you will use what God has given you that He will give to you again so that you may abound in His work. This does not mean that God will give you back more dollars and cents than you gave, necessarily. And if you increase your giving because you think you will get back more money than you gave, you have missed the point. Forget it, and start over. However, I doubt that I need say this. But if we “give ourselves to the Lord” as did the Macedonians (2 Cor. 8:5), and consider always that what we have is His rightfully; if we obey the divine injunction to give “cheerfully” and as we “are prospered,” because we want to give it and without considering what we are going to get in exchange, we shall receive abundantly. I believe the passage teaches that this blessing will include material prosperity. But not many of us are willing to trust the Lord to do what He would have us do. We are not willing to “let go” that we might “hold on.”

Truth Magazine XXI: 36, p. 562
September 15, 1977

By Daniel H. King

Two Important Finds

Over the last several months some very exciting things have been reported in many newspapers across the country with reference to discoveries in Jordan and Syria which appear to have either direct or indirect relevance for students of the Old Testament. In reading the accounts I have been tempted on a few occasions to write up a critique on the basis of the mass media reports but my better judgment consistently got the better of me. For several reasons I was determined to wait for reports issuing from the scholarly publications. One major reason is that one does not always get the facts right when dependent upon those untrained in a particular discipline (journalists are usually only expert reporters and not specialists in technical fields of endeavor); there is a well-known tendency on the part of news people to over-estimate and exaggerate for the sake of a mass readership; in addition scholars are usually more apt to be deliberate and reserved in their judgments since their scholarly reputations are “on the line” when they offer their opinions. One will have to wait a while longer to enjoy the fruit of their expertise, but in most cases the wait is justified. Too often we have rushed into print with insufficient information at our disposal and been embarrassed at a sudden change in scholarly mood and sentiment at a later date. Throwing caution to the wind is like spitting into the wind. We never like the results!

I therefore hope that my remarks are not premature or exaggerated. Conservative religious folk are often faulted for over-playing the value of Archaeology in the realm of Evidences. And, perhaps we sometimes deserve it. I have never heard of anyone yet who obeyed the gospel because of the Moabite Stone or the Siloam Tunnel Inscription, although both of these certainly fit into the class of those discoveries which are monumental in their impact upon historical and biblical studies. If I did I would most likely eye them with skepticism, since both things now are clearly aspects of knowledge rather than faith. Knowledge is demonstrable and amenable to validation through scientific means. Faith is not. Faith is “a conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1). It comes by the hearing of the Word of God (Rom. 10:17), not by scientific and historical testing and validation. I believe the Bible is true not because Archaeology has proven it to be true (which it has not done and cannot do) but because God said so. People believed the Bible before Archaeology was ever thought of and believed it no more or less since its present popularity. Those who believed the Bible before the many recent discoveries are encouraged and strengthened by them. But, on the other hand, nonbelievers have merely back off momentarily, rallied

their forces, revamped their strategy, changed their tactics somewhat, and mounted a fresh assault on the Scriptures. Nothing has really changed.

So, why do we bother to keep up with the latest finds in Archaeology? For numerous reasons. Assuredly it sets a tone of historical credibility and veracity for the book as a whole as demonstrated by those parts which have been tested in the arena of knowledge. As well, it has out-dated many of the older works which leveled criticism at the Scriptures from the standpoint of historical criteria and has set a mood of caution and solicitude (even gingerliness) over the whole of liberal biblical scholarship which has long been overdue. For these reasons and others we will ever remain in the debt of the many dedicated men who have spent untold hours sifting through the dust of ages past with the hope of giving posterity a greater insight into the text and background of the Bible.

The Balaam Inscription

From Deuteronomy 27:2-4 we learn that the children of Israel were to set up stone monuments in Mount Ebal when they inherited the land of Canaan and to overlay them with plaster. In the plaster was to be inscribed “very plainly” the words of the law. Apparently this passage reflected a custom of monument-making which was frequent in the ancient East, for the text of a similar inscription was discovered in 1967 and reported in the March, 1976 Biblical Archaeologist which bears indirectly upon the story of Balsam as reported in Numbers 22-24. The fragmentary text (or possible texts) was found at Tell Deir — ‘Alla in Jordan by Dr. H. J. Franken. It is written in a dialect of Aramaic which has many affinities with biblical Hebrew and dates from around 700 B.C. The lines are written in a kind of poetic idiom. Herein lies one of the important aspects of the discovery: heretofore Aramaic poetry dating before the Christian era was unknown. Further, the character of the material is prophetic and this makes it the first prophecy of any scope from the ancient West Semitic world outside the prophecies of the Old Testament. Here are a couple of important comments from Jacob Hoftijzer as to content:

“The first combination contains a prophecy In the name of the prophet Balaam, the son of Beor, known in the Old Testament (Num. 22-24; Deut, 23:5-6; Josh. 13:22; 24:9-10; Neh. 13:2; Mic. 6:5, and see also Num. 31:8 and 16). According to Old Testament tradition, this non-Israelite prophet had been summoned by the king of Moab to curse the Israelites, who were marching through Tranalordan Into Palestine proper; but through God’s Intervention Balaam was obliged to bless the Israelites rather than to curse them. In the Old Testament Balsam is clearly a figure who belongs exclusively to traditions about Translordan, it is noteworthy then, that our texts in which be plays a central role, likewise come from a Translordanian holy place. Also, in oar teats Balaam has no connection whatever with anything that can be considered characteristic of typically Israelite religion. If one combines the biblical data with those of Deir– ‘Alla, one moat conclude that for a considerable period of time the figure of Balasm took up a prominent position In a specific religious tradition In Transjordan.

The form in which the prophecy Is narrated resembles those in which certain Old Testament prophecies have been handed down ….

The second combination contains-so far as it is Intelligible–a series of curses, parallels for which are found In many passages of the Old Testament and In other ancient Near Eastern literature . . . (pp. 12-13).”

He further points out that “It is striking how many points of contact there are between this. text and the Old Testament” (p. 14). Certainly scholars are now in possession of a significant piece of evidence in this inscriptional material. We shall anxiously await further details on these Deir — Alla texts. For now we are grateful for the several points of confirmation which are obvious from this material.

The Ebla Archives

During the years 1974 and 1975 in the excavations at Tell Mardikh in North Syria, the Italian Archaeological Mission of the University of Rome unearthed around 16,000 texts from the 3rd millennium B.C. The language of the city called in ancient times Ebla has been labeled Paleo-canaanite and was previously unknown. Surprisingly though, this language represents only about a fifth of the texts. The rest are clearly in Sumerian, the language of the ancient Mesopotamian civilization known as Sumer. Under the direction of Professor Paolo Matthiae, the Italian archaeologists uncovered an entire era of ancient Near Eastern history with the finding of these tablets.

The texts reveal the history of the city of Ebla. They date from the Early Bronze IV period, or about 24002250 B.C. This is before the time of Abraham. Every kind of material is found in these documents: mythological stories, hymns to divinities, incantations, collections of proverbs, royal ordinances, international treaties, legal texts, school exercises, economic and administrative texts, etc. In addition, historical texts of many kinds bespeak the political history of Syria during the term of Ebla’s power.

More importantly for students of the Old Testament, however, is the fact that there are several points of contact worthy of notice. Firstly, in the texts we find third millennium documentation of cities hitherto attested only in the first and second millennia B.C., such as Salim, the city of Melchizedeck, Hazor, Lachish, Megiddo, Gaza, Dor, Sinai, Ashtarot, Joppa and others.

Among the kings of Ebla appears the name of Ebrum, third in the list of Eblaite monarchs. His name is written Eb-uru-um with two possible readings: Eb-ru-um, which resembles the biblical Eber, the father of the Semites according to Gen. 10:21; or Eb-ri-um, which reminds us of the name Eb-ri or “Hebrew.” In his article in the May, 1976 Biblical Archaeologist, Giovanni Pettinato chooses the second as the better alternative (p. 47). Many other names which appear in the Ebla texts appear also in the Old Testament in roughly the same form. The name Da-wi-dum (David) is present in the texts, over a thousand years before the son of Jesse wore it; Ish-ra-il and Ish-ra ya both also appear. And, notably, the name Ya (the Old Testament shortened form of “Yehovah”) and the name II (the Old Testament term El, or “God”) both appear in the texts and seem to point to a specific deity.

Much more could be said about this important archaeological find, but as yet the details are scanty and the interpretations varied. It will take many years to sort out and evaluate properly the mass of data that is now made available through the Ebla excavations. It is certain, though, that exciting days lie ahead for those of us who are intrigued by such things!

Truth Magazine XXI: 35, pp. 556-557
September 8, 1977