Truth Magazine

By Jeff Asher

We are living in a time when civil law and divine law are not in harmony. The ideal situation is that civil government be “the minister of God to thee for good” and “not a tenor to good works, but to evil” (Rom. 12:3,4). However, increasingly, government seeks to “change laws” (Dan. 7:25), God’s laws.

Fortunately, our government has not moved to the extremes of ancient Judea and Rome forbidding that men should preach Christ (Acts 4:18). But, it is nonetheless guilty in that it exercises authority to legalize and protect what God has forbidden and condemned. Ours is not the first nation to do this. Observe Isaiah’s statement concerning Judah:

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight! Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, and valiant men in mixing strong drink, who acquit the guilty for a bribe, and deprive the innocent of this right! (Isa. 5:20-23, RSV)

The experiences of Daniel, Mishael, Hananiah and Azariah in Babylon stand as proof that legalizing sin does not make it right. These four young men came to Babylon during the first installment of the captivity. In Babylon it was certainly legal to eat and drink what would have been regarded as unclean in Judah (Dan. 1:7,8). Yet, they purposed not to defile themselves. Later, Mishael, Hananiah and Azariah are compelled to worship the image of the king of Babylon which they refuse to do (Dan. 3:1-18). In this case it was not illegal to worship Jehovah, but it was also required that one worship the image. While Nebuchadnezzar was willing to allow the worship of many gods, Jehovah only allowed the worship of himself (Exod. 20:3-5). During the reign of the Persian kings Daniel is required to make his petitions to the king only, in other words, prayer to Jehovah is outlawed (Dan. 6:1-17). Here government went to the limit of perversity forbidding what God had commanded. Yet, Daniel remains true to his God in old age as he had in youth. These four men were not deceived by Satan’s attempt to weaken their convictions against sin by having civil government make it legal. Thus, they are remembered among the great heroes of faith (Deb. 11:33,34).

Our purpose in this study will be to consider some practices which our government has decided are legal, but which the Lord condemns. It is hoped that by such a study the faith of some will be renewed and others will be led to repent. Like the companions of Daniel, Mishael, Hananiah and Azariah, there are some among the church who have succumbed to Satan’s devices and turned asied to “legalized sin.” As we study together let us remember these great heroes of faith.

Legalized Intoxicants and Addictive Drugs

Since the end of Prohibition the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages has been legal in the United States. Alcohol sales generate a substantial revenue for the federal and state treasuries ($8.01 billion for the U.S. Treasury in 1992). The enforcement of the regulations and collection of the taxes necessitates a sizeable bureaucracy in Washington. Similarly, our government subsidizes the production and sale of tobacco. This, too, generates revenue for the government ($5.05 billion). Following this precedent there are those who advocate the legalization of marijuana, heroine and cocaine. However, the legalization of these intoxicants and addictive drugs will not change the sinful nature of their use in any amount.

The New Testament specifically condemns the drinking of strong drink in any amount: “For we have spent enough for our past lifetime in doing the will of the Gentiles  when we walked in licentiousness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties, and abominable idolatries” (1 Pet. 4:3, NKJV). The “drinking party” of the New King James Version is the “banqueting” of the King James 1611 Version. Notice that the text says drinking and not drunken. Of this word H.A.W. Meyer in The Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the New Testament says the term is “chiefly applied to social drinking at the banquet.” R.C. Trench in Synonyms of the New Testament says the drinking is “not of necessity excessive” (p. 225). The New English Bible translates the word as “trippling” which means “to drink alcoholic liquor continuously in small amounts.” Thus, the text condemns drinking strong drink.

While one may use intoxicants and drugs with impunity from civil authority, there yet remains the consequences of this sinful behavior. In wake of their use lie the dead bodies of innocent men and women (Mark 6:17-29), broken homes (Prov. 23:33), wasted money (Prov. 23:21), lost virtue (Gen. 9:21,22), weakened manhood (Dan. 1:5-16), corrupted manners (Dan. 5:1-4; Ps. 78:65), perversity (Gen. 19:32), ruined spirituality (Amos 2:12; Isa. 28:1-8) and others sins too numerous to mention.

Solomon knew the consequences of going after strong drink and the only remedy:

Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has contentions? Who has complaints? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who linger long at the wine, those who go in search of mixed wine. Do not look on the wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup, when it swirls around smoothly; at the last it bites like a serpent, and stings like a viper (Prov. 23:29-32).

Never take the first drink.

Tobacco is no better. We now know that it is an addictive drug which robs a man of his self-control. It too consumes money, health, good manners and spirituality. While there is no specific prohibition against “smoking” in the Scriptures, how can the smoker justify his habit in light of these general principles? Paul wrote: “All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful; all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any” (1 Cor. 6:12). Peter commanded the Christian to “add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perservance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love” (2 Pet. 2:5-7).

Legalized Gambling

May 29th marked the one year anniversary of the Texas Lottery. The State boasts that it has in that year given away 968 million dollars. Texas is a relative late-corner to legalized gambling. Most of the neighboring states have had parimutuel betting on sports events, casino gambling, bingo and lotteries for several years. Las Vegas, Nevada and Atlantic City, New Jersey have been gambling meccas in the United States for decades. Like alcohol and tobacco, gambling is a source of revenue for the state treasuries. On the average governments receive about six percent on parimutuel operations and 14 percent on lotteries. Thus, Texas made about $265 million from the lottery in its first year.

However, the Scriptures condemn every form of gambling. One text in the New Testament, Romans 13:9-10, strikes gambling out: “For the commandments, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, You shall not covet, and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this wrongheaded ought to be apparent to even casual Bible students. Saying, namely, you shall love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.”

Gambling is sinful because it is stealing. Granted all parties to a wager are willing, but this does not affect the fact that whoever wins obtains the proceeds by extortion. There are only three authorized means by which property can be exchanged. One may give or receive a gift (Acts 20:35). One may earn it as a wage (Eph. 4:28). Or, property may be obtained through a fair exchange or investment (Jas. 4:13-15).

Gambling is sinful because it is rooted in covetousness, that is, a greedy desire to have more. Those who gamble do not do so in order to provide for someone’s needs. If this were the motive, then following the example of the early saints is in order (Acts 2:44,45; 4:32,34-35). No, those who gamble do so in order to get rich. This is the base desire upon which the government preys when it promotes its lotteries. Paul knew that Christians would be tempted by such means and strongly warned us against the snares and temptations which covetousness brings (I Tim. 6:5-10).

Finally, gambling is sinful because it is contrary to the ethic of love. Jesus taught, “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matt. 7:12). The gambler does not put up his wager because he wants the other gambler to take his money, deprive his family and make him late on his bills. Let’s get serious. Is the gambler living by the principles of love, blessings, giving and praying for those who bet against him (Matt. 5:44)? Is the gambler when he wagers “envying not” and “seeking not his own” (1 Cor. 13:4-8)? Those who say they love their neighbor and then take his money on a bet do not know the meaning of the word.

Legalized Adultery and Fornication

In the last fifty years we have gone from a society in which it was nearly impossible to get a divorce, to a society in which divorce has been relegated to almost a do-it-yourself legal kit. Marriage is held in low esteem with many couples living together without its benefit. Legislators have advocated renewable licenses for married couples which expire every three years, more often than a driver’s license. The federal government actually penalizes through its tax policy married couples on social security. Even the courts of our land are ruling in favor of everything but biblical marriage. Recently the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the state must show a “compelling interest” for not allowing homosexuals the privileges of marriages.

The Bible is clear and easily understood on the question of who may marry. In the beginning God revealed that one man and one woman may marry for life, that is, “until death do us part” (Gen. 2:24). Jesus reiterated this teaching while upon the earth in Matthew 19:3-9. Jesus rejected divorce on all grounds but one, “except it be for fornication” (Matt. 19:9), and then only the one who puts away a fornicating spouse has the liberty to remarry. All who divorce and remarry for causes other than fornication commit adultery (Matt. 5:32). Therefore, the only way to avoid this sin is to “remain unmarried, or be reconciled” (1 Cor. 7:11).

To make matters worse some in the church are advocating that alien sinners who have divorced and remarried according to civil law, regardless of the grounds, should be accepted into the church upon their baptism. This cannot be; aliens are as much amenable to the law of God on marriage and divorce as are believers. Jesus said that “from the beginning it was not so” that a man could not put away his wife for every cause and remarry. Thus, God has never allowed men to divorce and remarry at will.

Consistent application of this principle would reak havoc on the morality of the people of God. Think about the consequences if the civil authority recognizes homosexual marriage, then those who are baptized must be accepted into the church. Consider if the gospel went to polygamous nations there would be men with a plurality of wives in the churches. That this teaching is sinfully

What Shall We Do?

When we see our nation obviously following the broad way that leads to destruction what should you and I do? Some have taken to the streets in protest, others have organized committees, preachers and elders are becoming more and more involved in politics in an effort to change the course. However, this is not the mission of the church.

Christians need to exhibit child-like trust in God’s providence over the nations (Dan. 4:25). It is his business to rule the kingdoms of men. It is our business to spread the gospel to the whole world (I Tim. 2:1-4) and save our-selves in the process. If the moral character of this nation is to be elevated, it will be accomplished through the transformation of the individual citizen into a child of God. Yet, if this nation falls because of its wickedness, no matter how terrible the destruction you will have saved your soul and the souls of those who hear you. Remember, brother, you are a citizen of heaven (Phil. 3:20).

Let us all strive toward that heavenly kingdom. Let us honor the king and pray for peace that the gospel may be preached. But above all, let us obey God rather than men (Matt. 7:12).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 22, p. 12-14
November 18, 1993

By Larry Ray Hafley

As Paul said in his day, “the mystery of lawlessness doth already work” (2 ‘Mess. 2:7), so it is in our day. There are misguided souls who, though they may have the best of intentions, would alter the nature, spirit, power and character of the gospel. Their ideas, if followed, will lead to wholesale changes in the church and doctrine of Christ. There will be a revision of teachings on everything from morals and modesty to music and marriage. Some who are involved do not see the far reaching tentacles of their present posture and position. They are blind and oblivious to the consequences of their convictions and criticisms. For them, we feel the deepest sympathy. Against them, we shall wage a relentless, withering warfare. All “the weapons of our warfare,” every gun in the arsenal of the gospel shall be trained on them (2 Cor. 10:3-5; 1 Tim. 6:12). Our purpose, like that of the Son of God himself, is to maim and to kill, to cast down and destroy, to help and heal (Rev. 2:23). “See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build and to plant” (Jer. 1:10). “Cry aloud, and spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins” (Isa. 58:1).

Let no one mistake or misunderstand our mission. “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and sinner appear?” (I Pet. 4:17, 18) “Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins” (Jas. 5:19, 20).

The “Germ” Of Truth

There is often an element, a”germ” of truth, in what critics charge against the church.

See Chart.

Whats Wrong with the Church of Christ?

“Germ” of Truth in Complaints, but men pervert, distort truth because they love error and hate truth (John 3:19-21)

19. And this is the condemnation, that light if come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21. But he that doest truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Examples: Luke 23:2; Acts 6:11-14; 17:7

Was it true that Jesus was a king and that he had a kingdom (John. 18:36, 37)? Was it true that Jesus was a rival of Rome, a usurper of the Emperor? Jesus’ enemies said, “We found this fellow … saying that he himself is Christ a King” (Lk. 23:2). They twisted the truth. Correctly, they said that he was “Christ a King.” Corruptly, they inferred that he was royal, regal, rival of Rome (Acts 17:7).

Why did they do this? What was their purpose? Ultimately, there is no way to “white wash” it. Men resort to such maneuvers when they love darkness rather than light. At least, that was Christ’s conclusion (Jn. 3:19-21). Men pervert and distort truth because they love error and darkness, and hate truth and light!

In coming articles in this series, we shall note some per-versions and distortions that critics make. We shall deal with them in detail. Here, though, we simply want to get to the heart of their complaints and criticisms. They say things like, “There’s not enough love shown”; “Our preaching needs to stress the love and grace of God”; “We should receive homosexuals and let them know there is hope”; “We should not exclude a person as a prospect for gospel obedience just be-cause they have been `messed up’ in a bad divorce situation”; “Hurting people need the healing power of the cross, not a `bloody nose’ produced by an argumentative sermon on the necessity of baptism’ ; “People do not care how much we know until they know how much we care”; “We need to manifest a loving, positive spirit, not a combative, negative attitude if we are going to convert our friends.”

In essence, who can disagree with the “germ” of most of the statements above? Can we ever show too much real, true, godly love? Who would say that we could? Does our preaching need to stress the love and grace of God? Absolutely! Are homosexuals and divorced people to be refused “repentance unto life” (Acts 11:18)? Certainly not! Should we lovingly care for people and seek to soothe their sorrows with the balm and blessings of the Beloved? Of course! Will warmth, kindness and friendliness help us to reach more people? Yes, a thousand times, yes!

The Hidden Agenda, the Distortion

The “good words and fair speeches” above often are used to mask a hidden agenda. When they say they want more love shown, what do they mean? They want less preaching against immodest dress and social drinking, but they do not tell you that. No, they give you the “germ” of truth; they present that which you cannot deny, i.e., we need more love shown. What do they mean when some say that preaching needs to emphasize God’s grace? They mean they want less preaching against their lifestyle, their sins. They feel the pinch of preaching that condemns their manner of life, but they dare not admit that. Instead, they say we need to hear more about grace, and who can disagree with that?

When they say that homosexuals and unscripturally married people should be included, they do not tell you what they really mean. They have a relative or a friend who is caught up in a “bad marriage,” and they want brethren to accept him. When one opposes false doctrine of divorce and remarriage, they will not oppose the truth that is taught. They are too subtle and clever for that. No, they will accuse you of “attacking” others, and they will ask if you do not agree that we should try to include those who are “struggling with demons in their lives.” They love darkness rather than light. That is the “bottom line,” but they cannot tell you that.

When they profess that a “positive” attitude is needed, what are they really saying? Some mean by this that they are “uncomfortable” with sound doctrine. They are “embarrassed” by sermons that teach the truth on music in worship and water baptism. They are “questioning our traditions” and “rethinking” their views on some of the “pat answers” that “the Church of Christ s been known for through the years.” However, they likely will not admit that to you! No rather, they will ask you if you think that we should be gentle in our “approach to people who are hurting in this old, sinful world?” Well, of course you do!

Now, what? Next, you will be enlisted in their core, their coterie, their group. Unwittingly, you will help them to carry the ball of rebellion against the elders and/or the preacher. You will not want what they want, but you can serve their purposes as you join them in calling for a “kinder, gentler” gospel of love and acceptance. You do not mean for the truth to be “gutted” and watered down, but they do! You innocently want what every true disciple wants. You want to reach the most lost souls in the most effective way possible. The men who love darkness are using the “germ” of truth to infect you with their virus of error. The germ of truth is the worm of error.

So, they will use you. Your soundness in the faith makes you an ideal pawn. Everyone knows that you stand for the truth. You will be courted and wooed by their sincere spirits and winsome ways. They will give you every assurance of their love for truth. They will insist that they “stand where you stand,” and that they are “only interested in not driving people away with a needlessly negative, hateful attitude that some of our preachers sometimes manifest.”

My friend, when you hear such things, an alarm bell should go off in your heart! “Take heed what ye hear” (Mk. 4:24). “And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch” (Mk. 13:37).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: No 22, p. 9-11
November 18, 1993

By Ken Cooper

Bible class teachers perform a great and far reaching service. Their praises frequently are left unsung. They are engaged in noble and glorious work of teaching the Bible. I really appreciate those who serve as teachers in our Bible class pro-gram. Especially those who teach my children. I realize the great impact that you have on all our children’s lives. I want to thank you for all your efforts and continue to encourage you in this good work. When I send my child into your class, I expect certain things.

First, I expect you to maintain discipline and order in the class-room. I know how difficult that can be at times, but I also know that it is vital to the child’s attitude to-ward Bible class and Bible study. I expect you do whatever is necessary to see that my child conducts himself in a respectable, orderly way. If you cannot accomplish this on your own, or are having problems, please come to me and I will do everything I can to help.

Second, I expect you to be a good example of a Christian before my children both in the classroom and out of it. They are observant. They see how you live and they sense your attitude, not just in the classroom but everywhere and anywhere your paths cross through the week. I want them “While there are times when teachers may feel as though they are taken for granted, be assured your commitment and dedication to the Lord and your self-sacrificing does not go unnoticed.” to have the greatest respect for you and to desire to be a Bible teacher like you when they grow older.

Third, I expect you to teach them from the Word of God. I expect them to develop certain concepts and attitudes toward God and his word. I want them to develop a deep respect for the word of God. I want them to know that it is the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth and that it is relevant to their lives.

Fourth, I expect you to teach them plainly and honestly about so-called difficult subjects. I want them to love the Lord and his church. I want them to learn what the Bible teaches about moral is-sues; that sin is sin and must be avoided. I want them to learn about God’s plan for the home including his teaching on divorce and remarriage. I want them to learn to love the Word of God and strive to obey it.

Again, I really do appreciate you and all your efforts to aid me as a father in teaching and disciplining my children. Many of us have never expressed gratitude to those who teach the Bible classes of which we or our children are a part. I know I have not expressed my appreciation to the teachers often enough. I also know that your motive for teaching is not for the compliments you receive, for they are few. While there are times when teachers may feel as though they are taken for granted, be assured your commitment and dedication to the Lord and your self-sacrificing spirit does not go unnoticed.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: No 22, p. 1
November 18, 1993

By Ken McLemore

Every false teaching eventually argues against itself. On the question of life on Earth, evolutionary theory argues against itself by failing to answer the question of the “first cause” (Rom. 1:20-21). The same kind of assumption under-lies the argument for the premise of the popular book and film “Jurassic Park.”

While the book and movie might be considered a good monster yarn, that is all they can be because there are too many questions that bedevil the premise about cloning dinosaurs in both. Cloning is considered to be the genetic equivalent of “xerography,” but it is not the creation of life; it is, at best, the successful use of existing genetic structures from one cell to produce a duplicate of that cell in an independent environment. No-one can create the genetic material within a cell; hence, the primary need in cloning theory is to obtain a complete cell nucleus from the subject to be cloned.

That is where the scientific premise of “Jurassic Park” begins, and where it begins to argue against itself as well. In order to clone a dinosaur, the scientists in the story need dinosaur DNA, the genetic material in the nucleus of a cell which encodes the biological blueprint of the dinosaur. They extract blood from a mosquito which had been trapped in amber so many millions of years ago, and now they have dinosaur DNA . . . but how do they know they have dinosaur blood? Granted that they have blood, but how do they know its dinosaur blood since they have nothing with which to compare it? They assume what they cannot prove.

The assumptions upon which the rest of the story is based grow directly out of the first one. Consequently, because scientists assume that dinosaurs were similar to birds and, therefore, had nucleated red blood cells like birds, they know that the blood contains DNA and they can clone a dinosaur. But, no-one has yet proven that they have dinosaur blood. And, that raises the problem of the source, blood drawn from a prehistoric mosquito that supposedly bit a dinosaur and later became encased in amber. Now, consider the probabilities of actually finding a mosquito trapped in amber which happens to be full of dinosaur blood, not to mention finding 15 different mosquitoes with 15 different species of dinosaur blood in them, as is supposed in the book. The mathematical probabilities of finding one such mosquito appear so improbable as to be a negative possibility. It is suggested in the book that some dinosaur DNA is obtainable from fossil specimens, but that only raises a fundamental question about the next major assumption.

Simply because a cell has a nucleus does not mean that all of its DNA will remain intact over time. DNA apparently deteriorates over time after active cell reproduction has stopped. Consequently, DNA obtained from a prehistoric blood sample or a fossil specimen would be incomplete. That raised the problem of DNA reconstruction and the genetic mathematics of a cell. Every cell nucleus has an hierarchy of genetic relationships which must be present for it to be complete. In humans, for instance, that hierarchy revolves around the presence of 46 chromosomes in each nucleus. Each chromosome is composed of a specific number of genes, and each gene is composed of a specific number of DNA strands, and each DNA strand is composed of a specific number of sequences of pairs of four basic compounds that interact with other chemicals to provide genetic instructions. Each human gene, for example, supposedly contains about 3 billion of these “base pairs” per DNA strand. The question is, then, even if dinosaur DNA could be recovered, who knows how many chromosomes are contained in the cell nucleus, and how many genes comprise a chromosome, and how many DNA strands comprise a gene, and how many base pairs per DNA does a dinosaur cell have? That important genetic mathematics is simply ignored in the premise of the story.

Assuming the unimportance of the genetic mathematics of the cell, the story premise becomes more concerned with the exotica of repairing broken or incomplete dinosaur DNA with that of modem animals with similar DNA, such as frogs. But how does frog DNA help if dinosaurs are supposed to have been similar to birds? And, the question arises, that, if the genetic mathematics of the dinosaur are unknown, then how will repairing dinosaur DNA with frog DNA produce a dinosaur rather than a dinofrog?

In the same way that medieval alchemists attempted to transform lead into gold, “Jurassic Park” argues for a kind of genetic alchemy that allows man to change the laws of creation. But, genetic theory cannot escape the principle that every seed reproduces after its own kind. Jesus Christ taught the principle almost 2,000 years before Gregor Mendel first observed it (Matt. 7:16-20). And, Moses revealed the principle in his inspired account of creation more than 2,000 years before that (Gen. 1:24-25,29).

The dinosaur in “Jurassic Park,” which is supposed to be from the Jurassic Period of prehistory, is not more than theoretical compilation of Jurassic Parts. It is the genetic fantasy equivalent of Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein.” It is built with spliced DNA from a frog, an assumed modem relative though the dinosaur is assumed to have been more like a bird, based upon an assumed genetic mathematics of red blood cells assumed to be a dinosaur’s, which are extracted from a prehistoric mosquito that it is assumed can be found.

“Jurassic Park” assumes that its conclusions are possible because they are based upon evolutionary theory, which allows man to play the role of God, as one of the characters in the film argues, that, “God made dinosaurs; God creates dinosaurs.” Man may assume cloning to be equivalent to creating life, but that assumption argues against itself by not answering the question of the “first cause” which puts life into its genetic building blocks (Ps. 139:13-16; Eccl. 7:13; 8:16-17).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: No 21, p. 14
November 4, 1993