Truth Magazine

By Tommy Glendol McClure

The morals of our nation and man-kind continue to erode and decay just as cancer slowly conquers its victim. Pornography, another moral issue viewed by many as being harmless, is a prime mover and largely to blame for this downward slide into the cesspool of moral decay and sin. Recently, pornography has risen its ugly head on the information superhighway, the World Wide Web. I am reminded of the words of Scripture, “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (Gen. 6:5, 6).

Pornography Defined

Pornography, an age old problem, can be traced back to first century Roman culture. By definition it is “the representation of erotic behaviour in books, pictures, statutes, motion pictures, etc. that is intended to cause sexual excitement. The word pornography, derived from the Greek word porne (prostitute) and graphein (to write), was originally defined as any work of art or literature depicting the life of prostitutes.”‘ Webster defines it as: “(1) the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement; (2) material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement.”‘ Pornography will be on the battlefield until the separation of the sheep and the goats on that great and blessed day of the Lord. True are the words of Solomon, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: andthere is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us” (Eccl. 1:9, 10).

The Worldly View

Pornography is one of the more controversial subjects of our time. There has been much argument on both sides and even in the courts. In 1957, in the case Roth v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that obscene material was not protected under the Constitution. Judge William Brennan wrote that the First Amendment had originally been written to allow “unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people,” and that obscene material supplied little, if any, social value. The Supreme Court went on to define obscene material as that which “deals with sex in a manner appealing to the prurient interest.” “Prurient,” according to the court, meant “material having a tendency to excite lustful thoughts.”

In the 1973 Supreme Court case Miller v. California, a ruling was handed down that remains the foundation by which a work is judged to be obscene. In this case, Miller had been convicted for mass-mailing brochures that advertized sex-oriented books. The ruling set forth in this case required that “community standards” be applied in determining whether or not a work is obscene. This ruling tightened the Roth decision, that obscenity was not protected by First Amendment rights.

Even though many Americans oppose pornography, there is much argument and discussion and little agreement by society in general on what should be done about it. Some see any restrictions on it as “censor-ship” of their First Amendment rights. Others see it as a form of discrimination on the basis of sex. In a controversial paper written by two antipornography activists (Andrea Dworkin, a writer, and Catharine MacKinnon, a law professor), they wrote, “Most frequently, pornography promotes rape, pain, humiliation, and inferiority as experiences that are sexually pleasing to all women because we are women. The studies show that it is not atypical for men to believe and act on the pornography. Each time men are sexually aroused by pornography  the sexually explicit subordination of women  they learn to connect women’s sexual pleasure to abuse and women’s sexual nature to inferiority.”3

No matter how the world or the highest earthly court may rule on pornography, God’s people must appeal to the divine standard of God’s writ-ten word, the Bible, and “not to think of men above that which is written” (1 Cor. 4:6). Honest students of God’s word striving to be “doers of the word, and not hearers only,” will seek, search and submit to God’s principles of truth regarding this matter (James 1:21-25).

The Bible Teaches

Pornography is sinful because it violates the principle taught by Jesus in Matthew 5:27, 28!

Jesus said, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” Jesus teaches that not only the act but the very thought that would cause the act is sinful. The magazine racks of our local grocery stores contain such porn publications as Playboy, Penthouse, and other smut publications purchased by those who have lust in their hearts (2 Pet. 2:12-14). Women who dress (or maybe I should say, undress) in sucha way that causes arousal of the sexual desires in men, are just as guilty as the men who lust after them (1 Tim. 2:9, 10). Jesus teaches a divine truth that is far reaching and this principle of truth applies equally to the male and female involved. Pornography violates this principle of Divine truth!

Pornography is sinful because it is lasciviousness!

W.E. Vine defines lasciviousness, saying the word “de-notes excess, licentiousness, absence of restraint, indecency, wantonness; . .. the prominent idea is shameless con-duct.”‘ Most certainly, pornography in any form is void of holy thoughts or actions. Pornography encourages a gross lack of self-control and self-denial. The mind or heart of the individual who desires to be party to this smut is without restraint and is condemned by God’s word (Mark 7:21-23; Rom. 13:12-14; Gal. 5:19-21). A Christian must subdue all fleshly lusts (1 Pet. 2:11).

Pornography is sinful because is promotes fornication!

All manner of unlawful and illicit sexual behavior is portrayed through this media. The so-called “soft core” magazines, such as Playboy and Penthouse, glamorize and glorify the life of a “Playboy” and teach that men can enjoy the sexual pleasures of the female without the commitment of a lifelong, lawful marriage relationship. The “hard core” forms promote bestiality, sadomasochism, homosexuality, prostitution, lesbianism, “kiddie porn,” and violent pornography. Fornication is defined by Thayer as “illicit sexual intercourse in general” (532). All of these sexual sins fall into the realm of fornication! Smut publications generally depict the woman as nothing more than a tool of pleasure, a thing to conquer and a mere piece of meat, rather than a lifetime mate who is an “help meet” (Gen. 2:18). The apostle Paul teaches that those who desire to inherit the kingdom of God must “flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:9-20).

Pornography is sinful because it dishonors God’s law of marriage!

In the beginning God said, “It is not good that man should be alone,” and he made woman to be an “help meet” for man (Gen. 2:18). For Adam, God made Eve, not Steve! And in Genesis 2:24 the record says, “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” Cleaving to a wife is far different than one-night stands and live-in partnerships which are glamorized by pornography. A good majority of movies and T.V. shows (even prime-time programs) promote and condone unlawful sexual relation-ships. Hard and soft core pornography flies in the face of the God-ordained marriage relationship, and the sexual union is depicted as nothing more than a recreational activity to satisfy an outof-control desire. The Bible teaches that the sexual desire is to be satisfied within the bounds of a lawful marriage relationship. The sexual union is re-served only for a man and woman joined in lawful marriage by God’s divine standard (1 Cor. 6:9-20; 7:2; Heb. 13:4).

Pornography is sinful because it violates the principle of the Golden Rule (Matt. 7:12)!

The kingpins and servants of pornography violate the first and second great commandments as well (Matt. 22:36-39). Porn pimps dish out their smut at the expense of men, women, children and even animals, for the express purpose of gaining an easy dollar (Eph. 4:17-19). Alcohol and illegal drugs are some-times part of the package deal! No love for God and their fellow man is ex-pressed by the producers and consumers of smut! The words of the apostle Paul ring true, “For the love of money is the root of all evil” (1 Tim. 6:9-10). And Paul teaches that those involved in such filth are given over by God “to a reprobate mind” (Rom. 1:21-32).

Pornography is sinful because it is destructive to society in general!

Consider the effects on society by the out-of-control AIDS epidemic! Study the case of Ted Bundy, a serial rapist and an admitted murderer of more than two dozen young women. Bundy said in his eleventh hour interview with Dr. James Dobson, “Pornography can reach out and snatch a kid out of any house today . . . It snatched me out of my home 20, 30 years ago … There is no protection against the kind of influences that are loose in society.” He also stated, “What alcohol did in conjunction with, let’s say, my exposure to pornography, was alcohol reduced my inhibitions; at the same time the fantasy life that was fueled by pornography eroded them further.”5 He also admitted how in the early days he was generally half-drunk, “almost without exception,” and alcohol diminished his inhibitions when he went on his rape and murder sprees! These are just a few examples of the poison fruit this sinful activity bears. Even though all consumers of pornography are not affected like Ted Bundy, this illustrates the destructive force of pornography on society. It is void of any good works (Gal. 5:19-21).

Conclusion

Brethren, do not be deceived and misled! Pornography is not just restricted to skid row or “adult” X-rated sleeze shows! It is in your local grocery store, in the words of pop music, and is even piped into homes through cable T.V. and computers that are “online” via the Internet, to name a few sources. This is a real problem that all Christians must battle! No judicial court decision can overrule the divine decision about this subject! In order to receive the inheritance that is reserved in heaven for us, God’s people must live under the constraint of Divine law, not under the influence of smut (1 Pet. 1:4; Col. 3:3-7). Without question, the Bible teaches that pornography is sinful! I urge all to adhere to the divine admonition given by the apostle James, “Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed” (James 1:21-25).

Bibliography

1 The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th Edition, pp. 615-616.

2 Webster, Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, p. 916. 5 Carol Gorman, Pornography, pp. 27, 28.

4 Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 650.

5 “Fatal Addiction,” Ted Bundy’s Final Interview with Dr. James Dobson (Video Tape).

3318 Saint James Place, Antioch, California 94509

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 13, p. 16-18
July 4, 1996

 

By Johnie Edwards

Many have taught against the use of tobacco over the years as a health hazard being harmful to the body. Yet, many members of the church smoke and try to defend such by saying it’s not habit forming, and they could quit if they so decided. Let’s take a look at some recent things which have been brought to light concerning the use of tobacco.

The Story Of Bill Tuttle

Bill Tuttle used to be a young, vibrant, gifted major league baseball player who toiled eleven seasons for Detroit, Kansas City, and Minnesota. Now Bill is 66 and lucky to be alive. He’s beaten the cancer for now but tells you it could return any-time. He can’t taste, has no teeth and has trouble talking and hearing. Not long ago, he couldn’t even sip a glass of water. Blame it all on spit tobacco. Tuttle chewed almost nonstop for 38 years. Doctors say that’s what caused the cancer that was discovered in 1993. Surgeons removed the largest malignant mouth tumor they’d ever seen during a 13-hour operation  the first of six. He told the Pirates about those operations, showing them his scary-looking face and gaunt body as he tells about the dangers of spit tobacco, which comes in the form of chew and snuff. He pulled up his shirt to display a hole in his stomach where he used to get food when his mouth and throat were shut off. The hole remains in case there is an emergency and he has to use it again. I ask, is it worth all this?

Nicotine, A Drug

The FDA treats nicotine, found in tobacco as a drug. In fact, it is a cancer-causing, habit-forming addictive drug. According to an article in the March 18, 1996, USA TO-DAY, Pirates outfielder, Orlando Merced, who chews tobacco, called using tobacco a “deadly habit.” Recent re-ports in USA TODAY, March 19, 1996, said that “Philip Morris Tobacco Company manipulated nicotine levels of cigarettes.” Smokers get hooked on nicotine just like people get addicted to other drugs. Evidently the tobacco companies know that cigarettes without nicotine would not sell!

The Liggett Group

The Liggett Group, makers of Chesterfield Cigarettes, according to the March 16, 1996 Bloomington, IN Herald Times, “agrees to second huge settlement of as much as $2 billion.” This huge amount is payment to resolve a lawsuit involving tobacco-related illnesses among residents of five states. Evidently Liggett would not have make such an offer if they did not believe that tobacco causes cancer, heart problems, and other related diseases! About 130,000 die annually of tobacco related diseases.

Young People And Tobacco

3000 kids begin smoking every day. That’s about 3 million each year. It is illegal to sell tobacco to minors. One young lady was heard to say, “I smoke.” A by-stander replied, “No, you do not smoke, the cigarette smokes, you are just the sucker.” How true this is. Young people need to heed the divine advice that Paul gave young Timothy. “Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity” (1 Tin. 4:12). Young people need to have the courage to tell the tobacco industry that they do not intend to let them despise their youth and ruin their health. Because some young people want to try and impress others with this deadly habit, you don’t have to. Since tobacco is a drug, young people just need to learn to say “no” to this tobacco-drug also.

Need For Self-Control

It has been suggested that about one-third of all tobacco users are addicted, for, they say, they would quit if they could. Such have let tobacco become their master and they the slave. Paul told the Romans, “Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness” (Rom. 6:16). The Bible teaches the need for temperance. Peter said that one of the items Christians must add to their faith is “temperance” (2 Pet. 1:5-7). Peter went ahead to say, “For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins” (2 Pet. 1:8-9). If we expect to have “an entrance . . . ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord” (2 Pet. 1:11), we must learn how to say “no” to some things. The apostle Paul expressed self-control this way, “But I keep my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway” (1 Cor.9:27).

An Expensive Addiction

Lost work days due to illness, hospital and nursing costs, much at taxpayers expense, are staggering. A lot of tobacco users smoke more than three packs per day. Multiply the cost by the number of packs you smoke and see how costly it is to you. A lot of church members, who smoke, spend far more on their tobacco-addictive-cancer-causing drug than they give toward the work of the church on the Lord’s day. And this is sad.

Our Bodies And Tobacco

Our bodies, in part, are what we put in them. Even tobacco users, are harmed by the use others make of it. I conducted a funeral for a fifty-three year old lady a few years ago, who never used tobacco in any form, but whose husband was a chain-smoker. Her doctors said that her lungs looked as if she had been the chain-smoker! She died of lung cancer. And yet, there are those who say, it’s no body’s business but mine if I use tobacco. Really? Our physical body houses our eternal spirit and we are responsible for it. The Holy Spirit said, “What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s” (1 Cor. 6:19-29).

“Each year, there are more deaths and disabilities from substance abuse than from any other preventable cause. Of the two million U.S. deaths each year, one in four is attributable to alcohol, illicit drug or tobacco use: More than 400,000 people die due to tobacco; 100,000 people die as a result of alcohol; illicit drug abuse, and related AIDS deaths account for at least 19,000 deaths” (Substance Abuse Report, Oct., 1993).

The same report goes on to say, “A person dying from alcohol-related causes looses, on average, 26 years off the normal life span; drug-related causes, over 37 years; and smoking related causes, about 20 years. One American dies every 1 1/2 minutes from the effects of tobacco” (A Healthier You, p. 186).

I ask again, Is it worth it?

Guardian of Truth XL: 12 p. 12-13
June 20, 1996

By Rick Harlow

There are many philosophies on the market which suggest those characteristics which are necessary to make a good teacher. I would like to suggest several characteristics which are critical for the individual who desires to be an effective teacher of God’s word. This list is not all inclusive but rather just touches the hem of the garment when it comes to effective Bible teaching. Teaching others was on the mind of Christ prior to his departure from this world to take his place at the right hand of the Father. “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew 28: 19-20). Let’s notice several characteristics of the effective Bible teacher:

(1) Takes Teaching Seriously: The individual who teaches others from God’s word needs to take his/her responsibilities seriously. Those who teach are in the unique position to guide some precious soul in the way God’s word teaches us that we might be saved eternally. What a tragedy it is that there are some “teachers” who do not take their responsibilities seriously.

(2) Present At The Appointed Times: It is sad to see some individuals who do not care enough to be present at the appointed study times. I’m not necessarily talking about students in this case. There are some “teachers” who do not even show up to fulfill their responsibilities during Sunday morning or Wednesday evening Bible Study periods. Sometimes these folks don’t even show the courtesy of lining up a substitute teacher. How can we ever teach our young people the importance of being present at all of the assemblies when those in positions of trust and responsibility fail in this area?

(3) Prepared: A good Bible teacher should always be prepared! A good Bible teacher will spend more time in preparation for a class than in the actual teaching of the class. An edifying and uplifting period of Bible study does not just happen by accident. It takes a lot of preparation on the part of the teacher!

(4) Humble: An effective Bible teacher will readily admit when he or she does not know the answer to a question on the mind of one of the Bible class students. Some teachers are not humble enough to either admit that they may be wrong on a particular subject or that they don’t know the answer to a particular question. There is no shame in not knowing! Be willing to admit when you may have made a wrong statement. Be willing to admit that you don’t have an answer but will be glad to study God’s word in order to find such.

Becoming a good Bible teacher does not just happen. It takes work!

Guardian of Truth XL: 12 p. 15
June 20, 1996

By T. Doy Moyer

That Jesus “emptied himself ” is not a debatable issue (Phil. 2:6-7). Of what he emptied himself, or exactly what that phrase means, has been an ancient debate. What I have to offer here may not solve any controversies, but I hope it will give some food for thought.

1. Any position which effectively destroys the deity of Jesus is wrong. This is the effect of the position that teaches Jesus gave up his divine attributes and characteristics. Those who teach this need to explain how Jesus could re-main God while giving up the nature of God. The nature of something is the attributes and characteristics that make it what it is. If Jesus did not have the nature of God, he was not God (see Gal. 4:8).

2. The text does not say that Jesus emptied himself “of ” anything. When we add “of ” to the phrase, and then start enumerating upon what all he supposedly gave up to come to earth, we are not being faithful to the text. We are reading into the text what it does not say. As opposed to being “full of ” himself (a modern idiom), he “emptied himself.” He did not empty himself “of ” a bunch of things.

3. To insist that “emptied himself’ should be taken literally to mean that Jesus had to dump something out of himself before he could take something else on is a misuse of the text. The text says, “He emptied himself, taking the form of a bond-servant.” That is self-explanatory. His taking on servant hood was a self-emptying act.

4. A good comparison can be made with Isaiah 53, a text describing the suffering Servant. Note in verse 12 the phrase, “He poured out himself to death.” Does that not have a striking resemblance to “emptied himself,” and “humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death” (Phil. 2:7-8)? As the suffering Servant, he emptied himself, poured himself out even to death.

5. The context of Philippians 2 itself shows what it means by the phrase “emptied himself.” Paul’s point of the text is to urge the brethren to be of the same mind, to be united and intent on one purpose (v. 2). To accomplish this, he instructs: “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others” (vv. 3-4). These are the instructions, but how does one do this? “Have this attitude in your-selves which was also in Christ Jesus” (v. 5). To reach the point of selflessness, one must look to Jesus. Why? Be-cause he is the perfect example of these instructions. Though he himself is God, while on earth he did not grasp after his godhood by trying to exercise his own independent will apart from the Father (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”). Rather, he “emptied himself,” which is the perfect phrase to describe the attitude of verses 3-4.

So what does it mean that Jesus “emptied himself’? Jesus Christ, in his role of the Servant, did nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but in lowliness of mind he regarded others as more important than himself. He looked out for the personal interests of others. How did he do this? Ultimately, by dying on the cross.

So, Paul’s point is that, as Jesus emptied himself, so must we all empty ourselves. It is simply another way of saying that we need to deny ourselves (Luke 9:23), for this is what Jesus did when he fulfilled his mission for a lost world. He set himself aside so that everything he did was selfless. Mark says it this way: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). These passages say the same thing.

6. The idea that Jesus emptied himself of attributes and characteristics is completely foreign to Paul’s argument. He points to Jesus as our example of self-humiliation. If Jesus emptied out of himself a bunch of attributes, then how can we follow this example? We can’t divest ourselves of our human nature any more than he could divest his di-vine nature. The line of reasoning that Paul uses to say that we should be selfless becomes meaningless through such an interpretation. It is an attitude that he is teaching.

7. Very simply, then, the text tells us that we should empty ourselves. We should deny ourselves, doing nothing out of selfishness. We do this by taking the attitude of Jesus, the supreme example of self-denial. He emptied him-self. As a servant, he completely submitted to the Father and poured out himself unto death. Afterwards, he was exalted. If we, too, will humble ourselves in like manner, God promises that we will be exalted (Jas. 4:10).

Guardian of Truth XL: 12 p. 14-15
June 20, 1996