Truth Magazine

By David Eldridge

In staying with this study of “what saith the scriptures” I would like to address the subject of repentance. The scriptures say much on this subject. In this article it is my goal to present some main points on this subject and clear up some misunderstanding about repentance.

What Is Repentance?

Before a person is able to repent, it stands to reason, that he must first know what repentance is. Repentance has been defined as a change in mind or heart brought about by godly sorrow, and therefore resulting in a change of life. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words says repentance “signifies to change one’s mind or purpose, always, in the New Testament, involving a change for the better, an amendment, and always except in Luke 17:3,4, of repentance from sin.”

These definitions are exemplified in Matthew 21:28-30. Here we see the parable of the two sons who were told to go and work in the vineyard. The first son said that he would not, but then, seeing the error of his ways, repented and went to work. This son showed a change of mind, and acting on this change of mind changed his life.

What Does Repentance Involve?

Repentance first involves a person acknowledging his sins. If someone refuses to admit that he is sick (Mk. 2:7), then he obviously will not see the need to repent.

Once a person acknowledges his sin, then this will then produce godly sorrow if the person’s attitude is right. In 2 Corinthians 7:9-11 we see this idea taught. In v. 10 Paul writes, “For godly sorrow worketh repentance.” We can see that this godly sorrow will work or bring forth repentance.

Once a person has repented then he turns from the sin. If there is no change in the mind that then produces a change in life the person has not truly repented. True repentance always involves a change in the mind followed by a change in the person’s life.

Who Is Required to Repent?

“And at the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). Paul, in his sermon at Athens told the Athenians that not just all men, but, “all men everywhere,” were commanded to repent. Repentance is required of every-one.

Why were all men told to repent? The answer is found in Romans 3:23, because “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” All have sinned, so all must repent.

The alien sinner must repent. In Acts 2:37 we see these men (erring sinners) cried out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” In v. 38 Peter told them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” We also see in Acts 3:19, Peter preaching the same thing with almost the same words. Peter tells them to repent and be converted so that their sins could be blotted out. We learn in these passages that for the sinner, repentance is a necessary step for salvation and remission of sins.

The Christian guilty of sin must also repent. In Acts 8 we see this illustrated by Simon the Sorcerer. In v. 1.3 we find that Simon was baptized and became a child of God. Later on, Simon tried to purchase the power of the Holy Spirit (vv. 18-19). Then Simon, a Christian, was told to repent of this sin (v. 22). From this we can see that a Christian, upon committing a sin, must repent of it, and that this true repentance provides what is necessary for forgiveness.

What a Lack of Repentance Brings

As we saw earlier in this article, without repentance it is impossible to receive salvation. So for one who is not a child of God, no repentance equals an eternal torture and punishment in Hell.

For a child of God repentance is also essential. True repentance brings forgiveness of sins, and without forgiveness of our sins, we will receive death, a spiritual death in hell, as wages for those sins (Rom. 6:23). For “all men everywhere” repentance is required.

In conclusion, we have learned that repentance is required for everyone, and that this repentance will bring forth a change in both our minds and our lives. And that repentance must be taught and used in every Christian’s life.

*David Eldridge is 16 years old.

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 8, p. 15
April 21, 1994

By Morris Hafley

I just wonder how the bride and groom would feel if the preacher showed up at their wedding wearing cutoffs and a sweatshirt. Would they feel like “Our wedding is going to be ruined,” “All anybody is going to remember of our wedding was how the preacher was dressed,” “Boy, that took a lot of nerve to come dressed like he was washing the car,” or “Somebody ought to say something to him”? Somebody would and they’d have every right, wouldn’t they? Yes! Yes!

How about a bride who comes with an immodest wedding dress. I am embarrassed as the preacher. She should be. Did she not try the dress on until just before she “walked down the aisle”? Probably the father never saw it until then, but the mother surely saw it on her daughter. Couldn’t you make a statement like, “Sweetheart that neck-line is cut too low”? Maybe the daughter doesn’t understand the effects of such a dress, though one would think since she is getting married she should understand. Maybe no one ever talked to her. That is a big problem, perhaps, with the failure of many marriages, no one ever explains to them the “facts of life.”

Come on! Moms and Dads, give your daughters a clue! Usually the bride is not taller than all the men to whom she will talk. They are already looking down at her. Maybe she is in the habit of exposing that much flesh. I hope not! I would think that when she tried the dress on her sense of modesty, which she should have as commanded by her God, would automatically kick into gear. But alas! At the weddings I have been to in the last few years the brides have lost their ability to blush in some cases. I have made an effort to compliment those who did not expose themselves. I appreciated their effort and they appreciated the compliment. I think those young ladies have more respect for themselves and their future husbands.

I don’t have any idea how many future grooms who will read this, or have some input on their bride’s dress. I doubt you can tell by just seeing a dress hanging whether or not it is cut too low. I guarantee people are “thinking something” when she marches out “in front of God and everybody” and displays herself with an immodest wed-ding gown. Here is a dress, whose color represents purity, but is giving a hint of impurity. Just a little (very little) more material would take care of the problem and it wouldn’t cost an arm and a leg.

Our dress expresses a part of us that can’t be seen, our character. What is this expressing about the bride? Not godliness or virtue.

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 9, p. 1
May 5, 1994

By Randy Blackaby

A perilous propensity to purge paternity from American life is leaving us a fatherless society and a host of long and short-term crises which we will be hard-pressed to fix.

Speculation about why a large cross-section of American children are growing up papa-less is varied. No doubt part of the answer is in the rejection of any morality beyond personal conscience. An over swing of the pendulum in feminism’s rush for independence is another possibility. And, men can’t escape responsibility either. The historic failure of many men to carry their paternal responsibilities beyond fertilization is undeniable.

But whatever the cause, statistics show illegitimacy to be a growing plague in the U.S. Census figures show a dramatic rise in these out-of-wedlock births, from 3 percent in 1950 to 4 percent in 1960 to nearly 16 percent in the early ’80s and now almost 25 percent in the ’90s.

These figures represent an overview of all groups and races in our country. A look at specific groups raises even more alarm and questions about causes. For instance: only don’t discourage illegitimacy but, in fact, facilitate it.

Few people in or out of government seem to want to sanction the adult participants in this moral degeneracy but our sympathy for the plight of the innocent babies born of this fornication has led to lifetime support of the mother and child. Fatherless children know little of a complete home and so they repeat the pattern in the next generation.

It is easily seen that the percentage of fatherless homes is growing in ever increasing leaps.

We are rapidly approaching the point where there will be no political solution. In our system of majority rule, the party of the misbegotten soon will have the votes to insist on the legitimization of illegitimacy. In the Afro-American population that majority already exists and whites quickly are moving toward the same.

 Among blacks, 67 percent of children are born out of wedlock.

The answer, therefore, probably won’t lie in political answers but in a rejuvenation or rebirth of Christian morality. As more and more of our population is made to suffer poverty, educational deprivation, absentee parents and the connected and increasing crime, drugs and unemployment, perhaps we’ll be able to see the truth and reason in God’s design of the home.

 Among Hispanics, the rate is 27 percent.

 And, among whites, the rate of illegitimacy is growing the fastest, from 10 percent in 1982 to 17 percent in 1992.

Unlike many other social problems that often are blamed on poverty, lack of education or other factors, American bastardy is growing in an environment of ever increasing sex education and prophylactic distribution.

It appears to be a conscious choice. It is not just a choice, as in the past, to participate in promiscuous sex, but a choice to produce children without marriage and usually without any plan to involve the male in the child’s rearing.

Without significant thought, American taxpayers underwrite and even encourage the expansion of this phenomenon through liberal welfare rules that not

That design calls for active and involved moms and dads who are faithful to one another and to their children. It defines the father as the primary provider and the mother as the primary keeper of the home.

It is true that there always will be families where this ideal can’t be achieved, whether because of the death of a spouse or because of infidelity. But the critical need today is to acknowledge that the biblical pattern for the family is the ideal and fundamental for a properly functioning society.

Our nation needs its fathers visible, responsible and active. Our children and our future depend upon it.

(Randy Blackaby is a former reporter, columnist, editorial writer and newspaper managing editor who now serves as minister for the Courtland Ave. Church of Christ in Kokomo.)

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 9, p. 
May 5, 1994

By Mike Willis

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18).

In our first article in this series, we emphasized that the Bible reveals the wrath of God just as certainly as it reveals his love. We need to learn what is revealed about God’s wrath just as certainly as we learn about his love. In the second article, we emphasized that the wrath of God is revealed against ungodliness. Ungodliness (asebeia) is that impiety that refuses to have God in its knowledge, becomes vain in its opinion about itself, and, while professing oneself to be wise, becomes a fool.

God’s wrath is also displayed against unrighteousness. “Righteousness” is justice  giving to both God and man what is their due. It is defined as “the state of him who is such as he ought to be… the condition acceptable to God. . . integrity, virtue, purity of life, uprightness, correctness in thinking, feeling, and acting” (Thayer 149). Unrighteousness is the opposite  the state of him who is not such as he ought to be. . . unacceptable to God. . . without integrity, purity of life, not upright, etc.

God’s Wrath Against Unrighteousness

Unrighteousness is the natural product of ungodliness. When men cast God out of their knowledge, there is no moral standard left for them. In his commentary on Romans, F. Godet wrote,

The moral sentiment in man is based on the conception of the holy God. To abandon the latter, is to paralyze the former. By honoring God we ennoble ourselves; by rejecting Him we infallibly ruin ourselves. Such, according to the apostle, is the relation between heathenism and moral corruption. Independent morality is not that of St. Paul (109).

We live in a society that has rejected God’s revelation as a moral standard for itself. It is searching for a moral basis for subjective morality. There is no morality independent of God.

When men turn away from God, God gives them up (Rom. 1:24,26,28). God withdraws his hand that restrains sin and allows sin to develop unabated. H.A.W. Meyer speaks of God’s giving men up as active judgment of his wrath. He wrote,

To the Apostle God is the living God, who does not passively permit the retributive consequences of fidelity or of apostasy  thus, as it were, letting them run their course, as an artificer does with his wheel work  but Himself, everywhere active, pervades and effectively develops the arrangements which He has made (62).

Godet comments on Meyer saying, “The law of history, in virtue of which the forsaking of God is followed among men by a parallel growth of immorality, is not a purely natural order of things; the power of God is active in the execution of his law” (107). When man has reached a certain degree of corruption, he can only be cured by the very excess of his own corruption. It is the only means to produce what all preceding appeals have failed to produce. Like the father of the prodigal son, God allows man to pursue his course of sin until it brings its own pig pen (see Luke 15:13). He judgment is this: “You dishonored me by rejecting me. I give you up to impurity that you may dishonor your own selves.”

God’s Wrath Against Homosexuality

As an example of how the rejection of God leads to the self-destruction of immorality, Paul continues:

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet (Rom. 1:26-27).

Ungodliness leads to moral depravity. Sensuality developed into homosexuality. The degradation of sin is a manifestation of God’s judgment against their ungodliness  their refusal to have God in their knowledge.

The politically correct position in the United States is to treat homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle. Homosexuality is not to be treated as a sin, a genetic mutation, or a mental illness. It is an alternate lifestyle that is just as correct as the monogamous marriage relationship of a man and woman. Anyone who believes differently has homophobia and must be watched lest he be guilty of a “hate crime.”

Regardless of what the moral judgments of those who have cast God out of their knowledge might be, the Lord said that homosexuality is:

1. An expression of sinful lust (1:24), dishonorable passion (vile affection, 1:26), and burning desire (1:27).

2. A departure from the natural relationship between a man and woman (1:26-27). Hence, it is contrary to nature.

3. Sexual uncleanness (1:24).

4. A dishonor to one’s body (1:24).

5. Equally wrong when practiced between two men or two women (1:26-27).

6. Disgraceful (1:27).

No amount of political rhetoric to secure a block of votes in a general election will change what God has spoken about homosexuality.

There is a “retribution” for homosexuality that is described as edei  “that recompense of their error which was meet” (1:27). The phrase refers to a retribution that is “necessary, there is a need of it; it behooves, is right and proper. . . . Rom. i.27 the recompense due by the Law of God” (Thayer 126). Long before AIDS became a modern problem for homosexuals, Moses E. Lard commented on this verse in his commentary on Romans:

It was a reward received in their persons  most likely a penalty in the form of disease which they suffered… . What the reward of their error was, which they received in themselves, we are not told. But from the nature of the crimes committed, we can hardly fail to conjecture it. The vices consisted in the grossest bodily abuse long continued. The result would be the worst form of those diseases which are known to follow such abuse (61).

The way of the transgressor is hard (Prov. 13:15). His way is hemmed with thorns and thistles to drive him back toward the path of righteousness.

What we are witnessing in the development of sexually transmitted diseases is God’s judgment of wrath against ungodliness and unrighteousness. Men are fighting his judgment, trying to find a cure to AIDS, venereal disease, gonorrhea, etc., because they are trying to preserve a lifestyle  a lifestyle that rejects God and does as one pleases, hedonism.

We take no pleasure in witnessing the suffering that this disease has brought t the human race. Especially are we sympathetic to its innocent victims. Nevertheless, we are not hesitant to proclaim that mans refusing to have God in his knowledge and turning aside to pursue his dishonorable and vile passions causes God to give up on him, resulting in this just retribution that is unsuitable to the sin.

One would hope that this retribution of sin would cause someone to turn away from his unrighteous and ungodly conduct and return to God. However the society is not ripe for revival just yet. The darkness of sin must yet become blacker.

Guardian of Truth XXXVIII: 9, p. 2
May 5, 1994