Truth Magazine

By Race Is Run

I received word on April 12, 1993 that brother David Joy passed from this life into eternity where he has gone to his reward. David married his wife Patty, the daughter of Paul Casebolt on August 11, 1973. To this union were born three children, Jeremy (18), Jennifer (15) and Micah (10). Nine years ago, brother Joy suffered a viral infection to the lining of his heart. He had to have a heart transplant to survive. For nine years, he has survived the heart transplant, at great medical expense and much suffering.

Brother Joy is one among several West Virginia preachers who have supported themselves in secular work and preached full-time as well. Brother Joy taught school at Paden City elementary and preached at Fly, Ohio (7 years) and Mellott Ridge (2).

David’s illness caused him to keep his priorities well-ordered. The burden of living for nine years with this disease has matured his children well beyond their years. Jeremy has been doing appointment preaching for four years. He is enrolled in West Virginia University in Morgantown where is studying to be a pharmacist.

The heavy burden of medical expense to the family was largely covered by David’s insurance company. Even what is left unpaid is beyond the family’s ability to pay. A later report will detail the expense and invite brethren to participate in relieving it. Too, we will give the details about his funeral, which are not available yet. However, if brethren would like to assist sister Joy or write her a note expressing their sympathies, they may contact her at the following address: Patty Joy, 313 S. 4th Ave., Paden City, WV 26159.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 9, p. 11
May 6, 1993

By Gerald E. Evans

Christianity, in its purity, is the same now that it was almost 1900 years ago. That which God approved then he will approve now; and just what he condemned then he will condemn now. So, if we would be approved of God we must stand where we know God approves and avoid all else. All who accept the Bible as the final rule of con-duct recognize that.

In Revelation 2:12-14 the Lord commended the church at Pergamos for some things and censured them for others. They were commended for holding fast his name, and for not denying the faith once delivered to the saints, and all this “where Satan’s throne is.” That is no small commendation! Those who take such a stand give courage and strength to all who know Christ’s appreciation for such a stand. But more, it involves showing honor to Christ. To hold his system of faith in all its essential elements will secure the divine blessing.

But where error exists, Truth demands censure of the error. Some in the church at Pergamos held to the doctrine of Balaam and also to the doctrine of the Nicolaitans. The Lord emphatically declared of such teaching, “Which thing I hate” (vv. 14-15). Recognizing the Lord’s strong disapproval, it should be obvious that we need to deter-mine the underlying cause of men embracing such doctrine. The effect is obvious in verse 14: idolatry and immorality! The basic doctrine of Balaam just could be a sin all too common among Christians: elders, deacons, preachers and other saints!

Balaam was an Old Testament character, the history of whom is found in Numbers 22-25, dating approximately B.C. 1452. He was a prophet of God after the old order, the order prevailing before Moses received the Law given exclusively to Israel. Even though he was a descendant of Abraham, he was not under the covenant of Jacob. The Israelites were his kin by the flesh but not in the religious sense.

Verse 18 was a noble statement, “I cannot go beyond the word of the Lord my God, to do less or more.” But the fact was that he went at once to obtain God’s permission to do what he had already said “though shalt not do.” This is like so many (even among God’s people) today. They are not content with the results of doing God’s plain will, but keep chasing Scripture, knowing that sooner or later they will find what fits the idol in their heart (Ezek. 14:1-4). I was told just yesterday on a Dial-a-Bible-Message response that Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 teach the use of instrumental music in the church! Like old Balaam, who claimed he “couldn’t go beyond God’s word, to do less or more,” this person sure was eager to get God to change his word, wasn’t he?

Can we be blinded to the cause behind the doctrine of Balaam, an unwillingness to accept God’s Word on a matter without question, and thus could we be condoning the doctrine of Balaam? Like the unconverted sinner, unwilling to bow in humility to the will of the Lord that they might be saved, too many brethren today seek a

Scripture that will make them acceptable to God like they are. They go to the word of the Lord to see what the Lord would say “more,” and find an answer to suit them. The same practice brought error amongst God’s people in every apostasy on record, and still works today. Some brethren simply are not satisfied with “what the will of the Lord is” if it goes counter to individual desire or some vested interest. No matter the hardship and pain obedience may afflict even upon the innocent, the Lord’s will changes not to accommodate the situation or the times. Sin is what causes the affliction.

Of what did the “doctrine of Salaam” consist? At least we know this much: “. . . who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality” (Rev.2:14). When anyone teaches that the divorced fornicator is loosed to marry again with impunity, in spite of the fact that Christ taught plainly in more than one Scripture that such would be adultery (sexual immorality), do we have “the doctrine of Balaam” and even possibly the doctrine of the Nicolaitans being taught among us today? We certainly know from the Lord’s letter to the church at Pergamos his attitude toward such doctrine. No amount of searching for “more” in Old or New Testaments will alter the declaration of Jesus, “But I say!” (Matt. 19:9) Nevertheless the search and arguments and debating and disrespect for “what has been written” continues, and “the Lord (has answered and) will answer according to the multitude of his idols in his heart” (Ezek. 14:3-6). Until all God’s people are “speaking as the oracles of God” and are content therewith, I believe “the doctrine of Balaam” will not only hinder the peace of God’s people but also will result in the loss of numberless, precious souls.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 9, p. 3-4
May 20, 1993

By Tommy Glendol McClure

Many today are currently arguing that homosexuals have a moral “right” to be such. Some, in an at-tempt to justify homosexuals, reason they were “born that way” and have no choice regarding their sexual preference. I am persuaded that even some brethren, lacking either a basic knowledge of God’s word or lacking godly conviction, would agree with this false idea.

It would be profitable to briefly study several Scriptures from God’s Holy Book to determine his attitude toward the unholy, depraved conduct of those who practice homosexuality. It is needful to first consider the definition of homosexuality, as well as definitions of several other related words which will enable us to better understand God’s will toward such behavior, this being the goal of this brief article. It has often been said, a well defined proposition is half argued.

Definitions

Webster’s dictionary  defines the word homosexuality as:

 

1. The quality or state of being homosexual.

 

 

1. Erotic activity with another of the same sex.

 

The word homosexual as defined by Webster means  of, relating to, of characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary).

When we consider the definition of the word fornication, it is clearly evident that “erotic activity with another of the same sex” (homosexuality) is included. Thayer defines fornication this way  “prop. of illicit sexual intercourse in general” (p. 532). This definition would include at least homosexuality, lesbianism, incest, rape, pedophilia, whoredom, and adultery  sins which, if practiced, will prohibit the ones practicing such from entering into the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:3-5; Deb. 13:4; Rev. 21:8).

From the Beginning

The very first book of the Bible presents God’s truth concerning lawful sexual relationships, that being in the sphere of a lawful marriage as defined by God, not man. The man is to leave father and mother and cleave to his wife, thus becoming one flesh, for life (Gen. 2:24; Rom. 7:2-3).

Looking back to the beginning, we note God created man “in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Gen. 1:27), to be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 1:28). God created man and woman fundamentally distinct and different but compatible and able to cleave to each other and become one flesh. Regarding being fruitful, the man needed woman and the woman needed man, in order to accomplish this charge. In Genesis 2:18 we find that the Lord saw that it was not good that man should be alone and he made woman (an help meet) for him. Thus from the beginning, the heterosexual relationship is the norm created and established by God. In Genesis 3:20 we read that “Adam called his wife Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” You will notice that for Adam the Lord made Eve, not Steve! Eve, is described as Adam’s wife (she), the mother (not the father) of all living!

Mankind was created “in the image and likeness of God” (Gen. 1:26), placed on earth to rule and subdue it, to have dominion over every living thing that moveth, thereby needing the God-given ability to make choices and intelligent decisions. In Genesis 3:1-6 we find recorded one of the first choices between right and wrong made by man, the decision whether or not to eat of the fruit of the forbidden tree. The woman (Eve) was first faced with the decision of believing the truth of God or being beguiled by the father of liars, the devil (in. 8:44), and “she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat” (Gen. 3:6). Sadly, the majority of the world follows Eve’s pattern, making the wrong choice by believing a lie rather than accepting God’s Word (cf. 2 Cor. 4:3-4; 2 Thess. 2:10-13).

Preference and Choice

While it is true we did not have a choice regarding our sex (male or female) when we entered this world at birth, we do have a choice between the heterosexual versus homosexual behavior and relationships in later years. If one chooses the abnormal and sinful relationship (homosexuality), over the God ordained normal and lawful relationship (heterosexuality), then that person is in opposition to God, preferring and choosing an abnormal, depraved, unholy manner of life! More importantly, any heterosexual relationship entered into, must be within the bounds of God’s law on marriage, to be lawful. Just to say the heterosexual relationship is normal, is not enough, for many are engaged in heterosexual relationships which are adulterous, therefore sinful.

Are homosexuals born that way? No, they prefer to be that way and they themselves make the decision! Fornication is at the top of the fist of the works of the flesh which prohibit entrance into the kingdom (Gal. 5:19-20). Fornication is sin and man makes the choice to serve Satan or God. Man was created with the ability to choose the servant whom he will obey, either sin unto death or obedience into righteousness (Rom. 6:16). When it is argued that homosexuals are “born that way,” having no choice, then those who so argue, charge God the creator with being the root cause of homosexuality which is contrary to his own design, purpose and will. Such reasoning makes him the king of hypocrities and an unjust God  creating “in his own image,” what he condemns in his word (Gen. 1:27; Lev. 20:13).

Considering Other Sins

The claim that some are born homosexuals can be shown to be false by asking a few reasonable questions. Are murderers born murderers? What about those “filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity, whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful” (Rom. 1:29-31)? Can we say those who practice these sins, are born that way? Without a doubt the answer is no! A careful reading of Romans 1 will shed light on the fact that men become sinners and are not born sinners. Men become enslaved to sin because of a love for the world (1 In. 2:15-17). Note the following quotations from Romans 1, with some contrasting statements 

 v. 21  “they became vain,” not born vain.  v. 22  “they became fools,” not born fools.

 v. 26  “God gave them up unto vile affections,” not created them with vile affections.

 v. 26 “for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature,” not born against nature.

v. 27  “. . . 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,” not born in their lust one toward another.

Paul clearly states the truth about all of this in verse 28 of the same chapter  those who practiced homosexuality and the other sins recorded, “did not like to retain God in their knowledge.”

Conclusion

After briefly studying this subject, the only conclusion that can be reached is that homosexuality is sinful and anyone who engages in such a sin will be rejected by God. The Corinthians were warned by Paul to flee the sin of fornication (1 Cor. 6:18)! No where does the apostle Paul reason that man is without choice in the realm of sexual relationships. No where does the Bible teach that man is in-capable of choosing between good or evil. Man has a choice, man makes a choice and all accountable people will some-day give an answer to God regarding their choice made between righteousness and unrighteousness (act. 12:13-14, 1 Cor. 10:13; 2 Cor. 5:10). Paul’s instructions to the Corinthians indicates, in no uncertain terms, that choosing the sin of fornication is forbidden by God. He instructed them regarding the God approved choice: `flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18)!

The body of a Christian is to be “a living sacrifice, holy acceptable unto God,” used to the glory of God and not to the lusts of the flesh (Rom. 12:1). Christians must stand opposed to and teach the truth regarding this false idea that homosexuals are “born that way,” having no choice in the matter of their sexual preference. We must have the conviction of the apostle Paul and teach the truth delivered in his epistles or we risk ourselves being unholy, and unacceptable to God. Yes, those who choose homosexuality, choose to be servants of sin, they are not born that way! When those serving sin fail to come to the knowledge of the truth through obedience to his will, they will reap their just reward,  “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 9, p. 8-9
May 20, 1993

By Joy Fuentes

I’d do almost anything for “my best friend”  some of my friends and family hate “my best friend,” but I don’t care.

I can be alone with “my best friend” for hours and never get bored.

I will defend “my best friend” to the end No one has the right to pick my friends 

I’ve noticed more and more people disapprove of our association.

Some say “my best friend” isn’t good for me.

I tell them to mind their own business, “my best friend” is not as bad as they say.

People can be so unfair  “my best friend” goes with me everywhere.

When I’m depressed, unhappy, or nervous, “my best friend” calms me down.

I’ve noticed some people move away from me when I have “my best friend” with me  that’s their problem.

More and more people are telling me some day “my best friend” will hurt me 

Some people are so radical. .

Signed, Mr. Macho Man P/L

 

Have You Met “My Best Friend”? (2)
My friends and family were right about “my best friend.”

“My best friend” ha! become my worst enemy, taking the most precious thing from me  my life. Now when I breathe I am racked with pain. I used to be Mr. Macho Man.

Now I am depressed all the time.

Because of my association with “my best friend” I have lost my hair, my memory, and my weight. I throw up and have diarrhea all the time (it’s like having the flu 24 hours a day every day).

Then there’s the radiation that’s used to control my pain (except that it doesn’t). Instead I receive radiation burn what torture.

My loved ones pleaded with me to quit smoking 

But I told them, “Not everyone that smokes gets cancer.” (Now I realize that not everyone that plays Russian Roulette gets shot either.)

1 also told my friends that “some people get cancer that never smoked.” That’s really a dumb statement now that I think of it.

But the worst argument of all is when I said, “Everyone has to die from something.” (I can tell you now, no one in his right mind would choose this death.)

Yes, I defended “My Right” to smoke 

Now, the same loved ones that wanted me to give up smoking have to remind me to take my medication, help me walk across the floor, try to get me to eat, cry with and for me.

My sister has to humor me when I’m depressed, cry with me when I’m overwhelmed with sadness 

And worse, she has to watch me, her only brother, die before her eyes.

I have to see my grown son cry uncontrollably.

I have caused my family to pay a high price because I insisted on “my right to smoke.”

This letter may not cause anyone to quit smoking, but I can tell you one think that will Lung Cancer

I can guarantee you one thing smoking is a slow and painful form of suicide.

If you think you have the right to take your own life and burden your loved ones, smoke away.

You can be selfish, as I was, or you can give your loved ones the gift of your living a few years longer.

Sure, some people will die from cancer that never smoked

But the worst words you’ll ever hear is a Doctor saying, “I’m sorry, you have lung cancer and it was caused by your smoking.”

Signed, Not So Macho Anymore P/L

Bob Colbary died at 5:45, September 22nd, 1992.

(Note by Ron Halbrook [654 Gray St., West Columbia, TX 774861: Brother and sister Paul Fuentes worshipped with the saints in Hemet, CA when I was there, but have moved and are worshipping with the Tustin-Santa Ana Church of Christ in Tustin. Sister Fuentes was once addicted to tobacco, but gave up smoking. She went through the painful ordeals of nursing two family members who died from cancer caused by smoking and another family member who died from cancer caused by drinking alcohol. She wrote “Have You Met ‘My Best Friend’?” with the direct input of her brother, Bob Colbary, reflecting his thoughts when he was dying from cancer. She feels that its publication will be worthwhile if it encourages even one person to quit smoking.

Joy Fuentes is another example of someone who has come out of error on divorce and remarriage. When she embraced such error, she was closely associated with some preachers who teach false theories on the subject. She has seen them (and their wives!) order their intoxicating drinks in restaurants. She has seen some of these preachers so addicted to tobacco that they smoked while conducting home Bible studies, which in some cases discouraged the student from continuing the study. When this disastrous result was pointed out, responses would include such comments as, “If someone quits studying the Bible with me because of my smoking, that is their problem, not mine. “Such preachers have also expressed their resentment against brethren who teach that we should not participate in mixed swimming in modern swimsuits. All of this has given her keen insight in-to how sin and error “increase unto more ungodliness,” and how “evil men and seducers . _ . wax worse and worse. deceiving, and being deceived” (2 Tim. 2:16; 3:13).

So that our readers will know I have not misunderstood or misrepresented sister Fuentes, she has read and approved this “note” before its publication. Her story is not unique. Others who came out of the same error told similar stories. Not every preacher who holds some false theory on divorce and remarriage will openly approve the other worldly practices named above, but there is a logical reason for the pattern which is developing. “Their word will eat as doth a canker” (2 Tim. 2:17). The ongoing development of institutional liberalism illustrates the degenerative nature of false doctrine. Error on divorce and remarriage has an inherent tendency to loosen the constraints of sound doctrine, oral conviction, and godly living. I am thankful for brethren like the Fuentes who are not afraid to speak up in the defense of the gospel and in opposition to sin and error.

Preachers who know the truth but are not teaching it and not exposing error need to wake up and realize what a grave injustice they are doing to people who would stand up for the truth if only someone would teach it to them! Jesus said, “Every man . . . that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me” (Jn. 6:45). Men cannot learn if we do not teach. The “positive, non-controversial” philosophy will not get the job done. Sound teaching of the whole counsel of God is designed by God “to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant” (Jer. 1:10). We labor under the inspired man-date, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:2). It is high time for all of us to remember the stirring words of Isaiah, “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet” (Isa. 58:1). Gr

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 9, p. 6-7
May 20, 1993