Truth Magazine

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

By Olen Holderby

Ephesians chapter five seems to be an appropriate basis for what we shall have to say in this article. Paul is, of course, writing “to the saints who are in Ephesus;” and he reflects upon several themes, one of which was the prevailing immorality.

Background

Most gospel preachers, no doubt, have prepared lessons making use of the corruption found in and about Sodom and Gomorrah of Abraham’s time (Gen. 19). However, we need not reach that far into the past for examples of such debauchery. William Barclay says, “The sexual life of the Graeco-Roman World in NT times was a lawless chaos” (Flesh and Spirit, p. 24). Further, he notes, “When Greek laxity invaded Rome, it was sadly coarsened. Hiberina says Juvenal, will no more be satisfied with one man than she would be with one eye (Juvenal, Satires 6:55). Roman women, says Seneca, were married to be divorced and were divorced to be married. . . `Chastity is simply a proof of ugliness’ (Seneca, On Benefits, 3:16.1-3). Innocence, says Seneca, is not rare, it is non-existent (On Anger, 2.8)” (Ibid, p. 25). Many ancient writers speak of homosexuality, mistresses, legal prostitution and state brothels, concubines, and incest. J.J. Dollinger refers to homosexuality as “The great national disease of Greece” (The Gentile and the Jew, II, p. 239 as quoted by Barclay, ibid., p. 26). Of particular interest is the fact that most of these writers are not Christians, but pagans who were disgusted with themselves. Fornication, in the name of religion, appears to have been an accepted standard for that ancient society. Even as late as the second century, the age was referred to as “an age when shame seems to have vanished from the earth” (J.J. Chapman as quoted by Barclay, ibid., p. 24). Thus, we can understand that Christianity was born into a Graeco-Roman world when sexual immorality was established custom and practice. Not many thought of it as being immoral.

The Apostle Paul deals very pointedly with sexual immorality in much of his writings. The man in 1 Corinthians 5:1ff must cease from incest. There was some in Corinth who had not repented of their fornication and Paul said that they must (2 Cor. 12:21). Such sins must be put to death (Col. 3:5). Christians must abstain from sexual immorality (1 Thess. 4:3). The body is not for sexual immorality (1 Cor. 6:13). The Christian must flee fornication (1 Cor. 6:18). According to these and other Scriptures, chastity appears to have been a new virtue which Christianity and its preachers introduced into the pagan world, but introduce it they did!

What gospel preacher has not used such corruption to show why the Roman Empire fell? It is, indeed, the truth! And, this fact has been used to warn of corrupt practices of our present society in America. This is as it should be, especially so for those who claim to be Christians. Just today (Feb. 23, 1993) I received a letter from a fellow-Christian; this good sister was complaining that the people around her thought “nothing of gambling, drinking, or adultery.” She was absolutely amazed at those “who go to some religious service faithfully” and yet, are not offended by such things. It is obvious that our age, in and out of religion, offers striking similarities with that Graeco-Roman culture that existed during the earlier days of Christianity.

Back to Ephesians 5

Fornication was one of three evils of which Paul said, “Let is not even be named among you” (v. 3). “For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God” (v. 5). Now do not permit anyone to deceive you, “For because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience” (v. 6). Do not be partakers with such (v. 7). You once walked in darkness, but now, “Walk as children of light” (v. 8). While walking as the children of light, they would be proving what was acceptable to the Lord (vv. 9,10). Not only were they not to participate in such conduct, but also they were to expose it (v. 11). Such conduct was a shameful reflection upon all involved (v. 12); and, the guilty needed to be exposed for all to see (v. 13). “Therefore he says: Awake you who sleep, arise from the dead, and Christ will give you light” (v. 14).

Of the word “awake,” Vine says, it is used “metaphorically, of awaking from a state of moral sloth.” It is suggested that literally it would read, “Arouse thee!”  a phrase used to stir men to activity. Obviously, Paul is trying to stir the Ephesians to active opposition to the immorality of their day, and especially that immorality that was in their midst. They were to arouse from their state of slumber and false security. This writer is persuaded that the Ephesians had no greater need to be aroused than do we today. Commenting on Ephesians 5:14 Albert Barnes said, “In sleep we are, though living, insensible to any danger that may be near.” Brethren, is this our condition today? Have we looked upon immorality so long, and in our midst, that we have come to accept it as if it were proper con-duct for a Christian? This writer has received letters and calls, sometimes feeling that he was showered with them, from people who were seeking a solution (or justification) for immoral practices, especially sexual immorality. These people were wanting out of (or into) a marriage relationship. God forbid that I should fail to assist my fellow-Christian in resolving any situation that brings unhappiness or ungodliness. However, brethren, that is not the real problem; the real problem is that so many of our number are seeking to justify ungodly con-duct or relationships, the presence of which identifies us with the world and not separation from it (Rom. 12:2).

With Paul I say, “It is high time to awake out of sleep” (Rom. 13:11). Preacher! Elders! Teachers! Let us be aroused from our sleep, whether self-imposed or unconscious, and without compromise preach God’s truth; and, let us do that until we have cleansed our ranks of those things that best identify us with the world. Hopefully, this can be done by bringing the guilty to repentance; but if not, then we must deny them our fellowship and expose them (Eph. 5:11). No excuse can justify any other route.

Confirmation

The thoughts and conclusions expressed above were further confirmed recently. During the month of January, 1993, brother Ron Halbrook visited California in a series of seven short meetings. This writer was one of those who urged brother Halbrook to make such a trip and to preach on “Trends” leading to an apostasy. Unsolicited reports and personal observation convince us that much good was accomplished. Brother Halbrook did an excellent job in presenting the truth and in handling the question periods which followed his lessons in each of these seven places. I did not hear a single point made with which I did not wholly agree. In spite of all this, there were some present in most of these places who strongly disagreed; and, they were permitted to say so if they wished. This effort with brother Halbrook pointed up at least two things: (1) There are still those around who love the truth and wish the truth preached on all subjects. (2) There is an urgent need for more such preaching.

I have preached in California in all but two of the last forty years; and, it is obvious to me that we have more than “our share” of immorality. The only remedy known to this writer is to be found in accepting the challenge of Paul to Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:1-2 to preach the word, in season and out of season. Until we let the world know that the world has no place in the church, the church will continue to be plagued by the “world within.” Brethren, surely you agree that we need an arousing, an arousing to active opposition to the immorality in our midst. We believe that we are up to that task; but we have to make up our minds to begin and to consistently stay on the job. It is not enough to agree; we must be active in our defense of the truth (Phil. 1:17).

Some Closing Remarks

We go back to Ephesians chapter five for some brief remarks and closing thoughts. After trying to arouse the Ephesians to active opposition to the immorality in their midst, Paul urges them to not be fools but to walk circumspectly (v. 15). Because souls are at stake, he would have them make urgent and proper use of their time, for their days were evil. Do not waste your opportunities (v. 16). Paul warned, do not be unwise and foolish; but, find out what the Lord’s will is and do it now (v. 17). Brethren, prayerfully I urge you to consider, we do need an arousing! May God help us all to so be!

“Brethren, surely you agree that we need an arousing,
an arousing to active opposition to the immorality in
our midst. We believe that we are up to that task; but
we have to make up our minds to being and to
consistently stay on the job.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 9, p. 10-11
May 20, 1993

By Donnie V. Rader

In Acts 2 we find the beginning of the fulfillment of the great commission to carry the gospel to the world beginning at Jerusalem (Mk. 16:15-16; Lk. 24:47). This chapter tells the story of the first converts under this commission. Peter later refers to this as “the beginning” (Acts 11-15).

In this chapter we will see what the prospective converts were told, what they believed and what they did in becoming Christians. Let’s consider an overview of this chapter.

I. The Reception Of The Holy Spirit (vv. 1-13)

The apostles received the Spirit (vv. 1-4). On the day of Pentecost, the apostles (“they”, v. I. refers back to the apostles of Acts 1:26) received the Holy Spirit as was promised in John 14:26; 15:26; 16:13 and Acts 1:1-5. They were able to speak in other languages as the Spirit directed them.

The multitude was amazed (vv. 5-13). There was an audience that had gathered in Jerusalem from all parts of the earth (v. 5). Their reaction to the Spirit-filled apostles was one of amazement (vv. 6-8, 12). Some accused the apostles of drunkenness (v. 13).

II. Peter’s Sermon (vv. 14-36)

Explanation of the events (vv. 14-21). Peter begins by stating that the apostles were not drunk and reasoned why that could not be (vv. 14-15). However, they were witnessing something that was a fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel (vv. 16-21).

Jesus was raised from the dead (vv. 22-36). Now, Peter gets to the heart of his sermon: the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Three points are made about his resurrection. (1) This is the one that they had crucified (vv. 22-24). Though their wicked hands had put him to death, God had raised him up. (2) David had prophesied of this resurrection (vv. 25-31). Peter quotes from Psalms 16:8-11 and gives evidence that David did not speak of himself, but of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (3) Jesus is now exalted as Lord and Christ (vv. 32-36). The climax of the sermon is “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ” (vv. 36).

III. The Response Of The Multitude (v. 37-41)

A. They asked what to do (vv. 37-40). Upon hearing the evidence of the resurrection, the people asked what they needed to do (v. 37). Peter responded by commanding repentance and baptism for the remission of sins (v. 38).

B. They gladly received the word and obeyed (v. 41). Those who had an open mind to receive the truth, willfully obeyed the instructions they had been given. The number was about 3,000.

IV. They Continued In The Apostles’ Doctrine (vv. 42-47)

They followed apostolic authority (v. 42). After this large number was baptized, they did not seek to serve God as their own desires dictated. Rather, they continued in the doctrine taught by the apostles.

They continued stedfast (vv. 42).

They worshipped (v. 42). The things that are mentioned in verse 42 are acts of worship.

They were benevolent to their brethren in need (vv. 44-45).

They continued in daily service to God (vv. 46-47).

What Do We Learn From This Case Of Conversion?

We learn what they were taught in order to become Christians. They were taught about the resurrection of Christ and what it means.

We learn what they believed. They believed the message they were taught (v. 41).

We learn what they did. They heard the message (v. 22). They believed the message about Jesus (vv. 36, 41). They repented of their sins (v. 38). They were baptized (vv. 38, 41).

We learn what they received upon obedience to the gospel. They received the remission of sins (v. 38). God then added them to the church. We conclude that when they were baptized for the remission of sins they became a part of the church. The same steps one must follow to become a Christian are the same steps to enter the Lord’s church.

You can be saved just like the 3,000 on the day of Pentecost. If you have not obeyed the gospel, why not do what they did?

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 9, p. 12
May 6, 1993