Truth Magazine

By Dan King

Those students of the Bible who have drunk deeply at the wells of modernism have been affected in most every area of their study. The conclusions which they draw are slanted away from any literal application of scriptural texts which touch upon such subjects as the miraculous, the unseen realms, angels and demons, inspirational and prophetical activities of God — in short, most every theme which makes the Bible a unique production of the Holy Spirit. The biblical doctrines of heaven and hell, found as they are in quite literal contexts, are not subject to any approach which would spiritualize them away. The Jehovah’s Witnesses have attempted this with hell, but do not use the same or comparable logic with heaven. The effect of modernism is to rationalize them away, seeing them in terms of ancient mythopoeic thought.

Modernists neutralize both biblical notions, describing them as part of the mythic world of the ancients. Believing, as they do, that the writers of the Bible lived in societies which were backward and pre-scientific in their perspective upon all aspects of life, they imbibed these viewpoints, even though they were filled with folklore, legend and common myth. The result is that they produced a literature which was characterized by belief in such. The biblical books are representative of the larger body of that literature, differing from it only in that these works were the “survivors.”

Genesis and Creation Myth

It has long been held by liberal scholars that the creation narrative of Genesis chapters one and two is heavily dependent upon ancient Babylonian myth. In the middle of the last century archaeologists unearthed Assyrian copies of the Old Babylonian creation and flood stories at Nineveh in the library of Ashurbanipal (669-633 B.C.), the last great king of the Assyrian empire. In 1876 George Smith, a young Assyriologist at the British Museum, published his epoch-making book The Babylonian Account of Genesis, which recounted the Babylonian creation myth, the Enuma elish (named after its opening words: “When on high . . .”). At first liberal scholars were tempted to think that practically everything in the Old Testament was borrowed from Babylon. Hugo Winckler became father to the theory called the “pan-Babylonian” view of biblical origins. His books Geschichte Israels (Vol. 1, 1895) and Das alte Westasien (1899) precipitated the “Bible vs. Babel” controversy, when Friedrich Delitzsch took his viewpoint to the ultimate extreme in Babel and Bibel (1902). Delitzsch attempted to show that there was nothing in the Old Testament that was not but a pale reflection of Babylonian ideas.

Hermann Gunkel, who authored Shopfung and Chaos in Urzeit and Endzeit (“Creation and Chaos in Beginning-time and End-time,” 1985), was one of the first to assess this mythological tradition upon the Bible. From a “history of religions” viewpoint, Gunkel argued that the Babylonian creation myth concerning Marduk’s victorious combat against the dragon Tiamat and her chaotic allies had tremendous influence upon the writers of Scripture. And, although his approach has since been refined by subsequent scholars, Bernhard W. Anderson in his book Creation versus Chaos, still posits that the Babylonian story is at the root of the entire ancient near eastern tradition which became the source for the Bible narrative. All he adds, in terms of approach, is a discussion of the mythological texts from Ras Shamra (ancient Ugarit) dating from about 1400 B.C., wherein Baal, the stormgod of old Canaan battles, Yam the god of the sea, and Nahar the god of the River. He, like many other modern liberal scholars, sees Canaanite religion as the bridge through which these notions were mediated to ancient Israel.

Despite the fact that scholars have often demonstrated the glaring differences between the creation story as told in Genesis and that in the Babylonian epic, and how strained are the similarities, this position continues to be put forward as the correct one. K.A. Kitchen writes: “Assyriological scholarship has by now largely rejected the old idea that Genesis 1-2 had any close relation at all with Enuma elish. Such is essentially the verdict of Heidel, Kinnier-Wilson, Lambert, and Millard, for example. Writers on the Old Testament who suggest the contrary are out of date” (The Bible in its World 27).

Biblical Cosmology

Perhaps more to the point, the idea of cosmology as taught in the Bible has come under fire as one aspect of modernism’s assault on scriptural concepts. Heaven and hell are viewed as aspects of a “three-storied universe” which went out of vogue conceptually with the beginning of the scientific era. The old notion is seen as having been a part of the fabric of ancient thought about the world. One scholar articulates it this way:

“By 3000 B.C., Sumerian culture in lower Mesopotamia had already worked out, it seems, a view of the universe which was to endure with only minor modifications for over 2000 years. The three fold division of the universe with which we are familiar from the Bible is found in Sumerian culture. Heaven, consisting of various regions, is the abode of the gods. The earth, conceived of as a disk, and the underworld complete the divisions of the universe. The primeval waters are located both above the vault of heaven and below the earth. The upper and lower seas (the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf) represent the limits of the earth. The vault of heaven rests upon the outermost bounds of the earth, thus enclosing man in an earth which is protected from destruction by the firm underside of heaven and by the under-earth mountains which support the disc-earth over the lower primeval waters. This cosmological picture is precisely that found in the Old Testament (Walter Harrelson, The Significance of Cosmology in the Ancient Near East 257; also in From Fertility Cult to Worship 2).

In order to make the Old Testament fit this scenario, modernist scholars must do two things. First, they find it necessary to literalize highly figurative expressions from the book of Psalms and elsewhere. Terms like “waters above the firmament” are taken for seas that existed above the sky, rather than the sources of rain in the clouds; “storehouses of snows,” “storehouses of hail,” and “chambers of the winds” are taken literally — even though we might ourselves use such language today in a figurative sense. “Waters under the earth” are viewed as underground rivers of the nether world, instead of the waters of the ocean (which are indeed below the land). Heaven and hell are seen as mere hold overs in this ancient way of seeing the universe. Modern scientific man should not take them seriously, for they are pre-critical in their origin.

The second thing many scholars do is to ignore the general tendency of the Old Testament to strike out beyond the mythic approach to the world as taken by Israel’s neighbors, and even to attack many of their ideas directly. In a most helpful chapter in the book Before Philosophy: The Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man, called “The Emancipation of Thought From Myth” the authors (H. and H. A. Frankfort) suggest that Israel broke from the mythic traditions of the ancient world: “The God of the psalmists and the prophets was not in nature. He transcended nature — and transcended, likewise, the realm of mythopoeic thought. It would seem that the Hebrews, no less than the Greeks, broke with the mode of speculation which had prevailed up to their time” (237).

Probably the most outrageous statement of this belief, as it applies to the New Testament, came from the pen of Rudolf Bultmann in his essay New Testament and Mythology: “The cosmology of the New Testament is essentially mythical in character. The world is viewed as a three-storied structure, with the earth in the center, the heaven above, and the underworld beneath. . . Supernatural forces intervene in the course of nature. . . Miracles are by no means rare.” Bultmann did not conceal his general skepticism, suggesting that the New Testament needed to be “demythologized” in order to be rescued from this pre-scientific thinking. Bultmann’s favorite teacher was the avowed atheist Heidegger who applauded Bultmann for “making theology out of my philosophy” (quoted in Carl F.H. Henry, Frontiers in Modern Theology 19). Although much of his methodology has gone by the wayside as newer scholars and schools of thought have taken his place, yet there is still a skepticism on the part of liberal scholars as to the existence of the unseen realm.

A Kinder, Gentler Doctrine

Finally, the liberal approach to heaven and hell has been affected by the tendency among liberal scholars to make Christian doctrine “nice” and “clean it up” so that it is more acceptable to the modern mind. Of course, the modern mind tends to be much more hostile to the notion of punishment, especially if it is considered harsh. In our own society it is the liberal who is ever worried over whether government will mete out some punishment which is considered “cruel and unusual” (i.e. the death penalty), and so contrary to the constitution. Beyond this, the liberal is concerned that we not punish the criminal at all. He is more interested in having a program of rehabilitation rather than punishment. “Give the guy another chance . . . and another . . . and another.” Never mind the consequences for society generally or for the victims specifically.

There is little doubt that the same thinking is at work in the effort to undermine the biblical doctrine of hell. The liberal cannot believe in a God who will punish, much less punish in a place and under circumstances so terrible, as are portrayed in the scriptural pictures of hell.

All of his reasonings and rationalizations notwithstanding, it is still the teaching of the Word of God. Let us not fall prey to such subjective and heretical thinking, for in doing so we may very well experience the reality of God’s place of punishment for the wicked — first-hand!

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 1, p. 14
January 7, 1993

By John A. Smith

The recent fall of Communism and the collapse of the iron curtain has resulted in an open door for the gospel. The victory and praise belong to the Lord. The Almighty has dramatically answered years of earnest prayers. The ancient foe of atheism has suffered a devastating defeat. A near century of atheism has left the Russian people with empty, hungry souls. Atheism has failed them. Communism did not deliver on its promises. Neither of these was able to provide adequate answers to the great questions of life. The Russian people are searching for the answers that can come only from the Lord. Out of the fall of Communism has arisen the Lord’s victory.

From September 10 to October 8, 1992, five American preachers joined with Dan Tholen and Mike Garth for an intensive effort to reach lost souls in Moscow. The team consisted of Tommy Poarch (Montgomery, AL), Greg Gwin (Knoxville, TN), Phil Morgan (Paris, KY), Steve Brewer (Layafette, IN), and me. Dan Tholen had traveled to Moscow in July for a three week language study program and decided to stay. His friend Mike Garth joined him in August. These two young men have found their niche. They are doing an incredible job, facing their challenge with enthusiasm, faith, zeal, and wisdom beyond their years.

We traveled to Moscow in search of hungry, lost souls. We planned and prayed for nearly a year. Our constant prayer was that God would lead us to honest, hungry, searching souls. Through the power of God’s Word, four-teen souls put on Christ. The first was Olya, an 18-year-old college student who quickly developed into one of our translators and co-workers. Her service and friendship was invaluable. Other converts in Moscow included Meesha, a 27-year-old mechanical engineer, Marat, Artyom, and Alexander, college students. Anna, Tatyana and Nicolai (a daughter, mother, and father) were the first fruits of Podolsk. Joining this family in Podolsk was Katya, Tonya, Valya,. Zina, Sasha, and Ludmila friends and neighbors of Anna. The five of us were insignificant, flawed vessels used by the Master to accomplish a great victory. The victory was the Lord’s. The praise belongs to him.

The five of us did not know what we would find when we arrived in Moscow. None of us knew the language well and needed a translator when speaking to those who did not know English. We did not know their culture and in some cases not even each other. Phil had made a guess of what we would attempt to accomplish on a calendar, but with the exception of arriving and leaving on schedule, we did not follow it at all. The Lord had other things, greater things, awaiting us. We knew there were two young men working in Moscow, but would their youth be an advantage or a hindrance? We knew we would find two Russian Christians, both women with little in common except their allegiance to Jesus. What kind of relationship would they have? How would that affect our work? Would the people be receptive to the gospel? Would they be friendly or antagonistic to Americans? We were filled with questions, and very much sensed our complete dependence on the Lord.

We owe a great debt to John Ferrel (Fresno CA), and Carrol and Betty Puckett (Montgomery, AL). They spent three hot summer weeks in Moscow and did much that resulted in our work being easier and more fruitful. The news that they brought back encouraged and emboldened us.

Elena Zakheim, converted in July 1991, worked tirelessly to make the necessary preparations for our work. Without her work of arranging housing, advertising, and securing a place to meet, our work could not have begun so quickly or gone so smoothly. She served us well during the trip as a very capable translator. She gave of herself day and night, using her language skills and knowledge of the Russian people to make our work possible. We owe sister Elena a great debt of gratitude.

The Lord provided a variety of incredible teaching opportunities. A small advertisement placed in a Moscow newspaper and flyers on dorm doors brought an average of 20 Russian non-Christians to evening Bible studies. We met in a geological lab four nights a week for four weeks on the campus of Moscow State University. The building, nestled among trees and dorms, was difficult to locate, and yet people from all over the city found their way to the classes. The students ranged from Ludmilla, a middle-aged woman with a staunch allegiance to the Russian Orthodox church, to Marat, a college student who was at best a skeptic when he arrived. Five classes were offered each evening. These included “Evidences,” “The Sermon on the Mount,” “The Life of Christ,” “James,” and a study of English using the Bible as the test. All the classes were well received.

From the evening classes came many occasions for private studies. It was not unusual to arrive for a private study to discover that it had turned into a group study. In the spirit of Cornelius, they would invite their friends to hear the things of God. The Russian people with whom we studied were very gracious and hospitable. There was no hesitation on their part to having Americans come into their home or dorm room for a Bible study.

Two small advertisements placed in a Moscow newspaper prior to our arrival invited people to study the Bible by mail. From these two advertisements came over 200 responses. What I found amazing was that the first ad gave Dan Tholen’s home address in Florida and over 50 responses arrived there. The second ad carried a Moscow address. The total response was so overwhelming that it was decided not to advertise any more for a while because the work load of keeping up with these was simply too much to handle. Nearly all of the responses were in Russian, which meant that we had to have one of the Russian Christians translate the letters for us so that we would know of any special interest or needs (many did not have a Bible). The lessons had to be graded and the return envelopes addressed with the help of a translator. It proved to be a slow process. Phil Morgan worked tirelessly on this project and was the sparkplug that kept it on schedule and going. In our absence, the correspondence course now involves some of the new converts in a worthwhile teaching program.

One of the most exciting and rewarding teaching opportunities that I faced was at School no. 67, a Moscow high school. I was invited to join the faculty as an English teacher and was allowed to use the Bible as my text book. I had prepared and printed a series of lessons in advance that were well received by the faculty and students. Dan Tholen and Mike Garth were already teaching two days a week at School no. 67, and their good example made it much easier for me to be accepted.

The students and faculty were excited to have an American among them, but they were even more excited to learn about the Bible. Beneath where pictures of Marx and Lenin once hung, I spoke of the inspired Word of God, Paul’s unashamed defense of the gospel, God’s message to young people, the answers to life’s great questions found in the Bible, and the love of a Savior who paid their debt. For many it was the first time they had heard a believer speak of Jesus. Many had the opportunity to read the Bible for themselves for the first time. Over 30 students stayed after school on Fridays for another Bible study. I cannot adequately express in words what a thrill it was to hear Russian students walk down the hallway of their school singing “The wise man built his house. . .” and “How Great Thou Art.” More than once, I had to turn away and choke back tears of joy.

Ordinary daily occurrences also lead to teaching opportunities. One afternoon Steve Brewer was walking down a hallway at MSU when he bumped into a lady. He politely said, “Excuse me,” in English. This lead to an invitation to speak to several of the professor’s classes about his belief in the Bible. While studying with a college student one after-noon, Steve found himself in the room where the English club was to meet. Once again, Steve found himself invited to speak to a group of college students about the Bible.

One of the most exciting developments involved opportunities to teach in the city of Podolsk, southwest of Moscow. Last summer on Phil and Greg’s last day in Moscow they decided to pass out the last of their Bibles and correspondence courses in Gorky Park. They distributed many without knowing who received them or if any good would come from them. A young high school student, Anna from Podolsk, received a Bible and correspondence course. During the next several months, Anna completed the course and corresponded with Phil. Arrangements were made for Anna to come to Moscow for worship on our first Sunday in Moscow. Anna, her mother, her five-year-old brother, and two friends left home at 5:00 a.m. to make sure that they could make all the public transportation connections to arrive on time.

Greg, Phil, and Elena were invited to study in their home the following Saturday. The next day Anna and her mother Tatyana were baptized. The following Saturday a group once again traveled to Podolsk for a study and found the small apartment crowded with people interested in studying the Bible. That afternoon, Nickolai, Anna’s father was baptized. He is a wonderful man with a heart of gold. On the next two Saturdays the same routine was followed. On our last Sunday in Moscow, five precious souls from Podolsk were baptized. There is now a congregation of God’s people meeting in Podolsk. Dan and Mike are traveling to Podolsk each Sunday afternoon after services in Moscow to preach and teach.

During our four weeks in Moscow, I was blessed with the opportunity to teach 38 Bible studies. Eighteen of these were at School no. 67 with an average attendance of 25 students per class. Fourteen of the studies were evening classes at the geological lab with an average attendance of 7 students in my class. The remaining 6 classes were private studies con-ducted in dorm rooms, parks, and people’s flats. I do not mention this to “toot my horn,” but to illustrate the incredible interest and opportunities available in Moscow. All these studies were easy to arrange. None of us went out aggressively to arrange studies. We had as many Bible studies as we could manage, given the time constraints under which we labored, by simply accepting the invitations for Bible studies that were extended by the students themselves. The fields are truly “white unto harvest.”

Not all our memories involve “success stories.” My last “home study” was in a university dorm room with two students who had attended each of the night classes I had taught. Julie, a post graduate mathematics student from Siberia, was a bright-eyed, happy young lady who struggled with the guilt of her sins. Having been an atheist for most of her life, she carried tons of guilt for having rejected and ridiculed the notion of God. She could not understand how it was possible for God to forgive her. At the end of our study she acknowledged that she believed in God and Jesus as his Son, and understood what God required of her, but she needed more time to make sure of the commitment she was making. Julie, like many Russians, was slow to embrace what she was taught. The Russian people have been lied to for so long that they are naturally skeptical and investigate what they are told very carefully. It is not realistic to expect all of them to give up quickly what they have believed for decades. I earnestly hope and pray that her heart will re-main tender, and judgment will be delayed until she makes that commitment.

Igor, a Ukrainian post graduate student, attended the study with Julie. I grew quite fond of Igor and had great respect for the interest and intensity with which he studied the Bible. Unlike Julie, Igor had been a “believer” most of his life. His parents, staunch members of the Russian Orthodox Church even when religion was illegal, had him baptized in the Russian Orthodox church when he was an infant. At the conclusion of our last study, Igor hung his head and with tears in his eyes said, “I know what God requires. But I must decide whether to obey God and anger my parents or please my parents and displease God.” I don’t know that I have ever seen someone agonize over a response to the Lord as did Igor. It is difficult for me to think of Igor without tears forming in my eyes. As with Julie, I pray that the seed sown in his heart will someday germinate and produce abundant fruit.

There were some people who came to the studies motivated only by curiosity. Some came just to associate with Americans. Some were only interested in learning more English and seeing what they could get from us. Others came to teach us. This caused us to rejoice all the more over the honest hearts that were touched by the gospel.

It was with much concern that we left these babes in Christ behind. Thoughts of “what will become of them? How will they survive the political unrest in Russia, the coming winter, and the escalating prices” filled our minds. But, our greatest concern was for their spiritual well being. These babes needed grounding and establishing in their faith. What was accomplished in Moscow was of the Lord. It was his victory. These were his children. They were fruit to his glory. We had prayed together, studied together, and worked together, and now it was time for us to trust God together. God promised to take care of those who seek first his kingdom, and we must trust him to do so. Knowing that capable men like Dan and Mike were staying behind eased the concern of our leaving. I thank God for them.

For over a year I heard brother Jim Porter pray that the Lord would bless the sowing of the seed in Russia. He prayed often that like little acorns produce giant oak trees the gospel would bear rich and abundant fruit in Moscow. brother Jim’s prayer was answered.

The door for the gospel is clearly open in the former Soviet Union. The Russian people are keenly interested in learning more about God and the Bible. It is not unusual to see people weep when they receive a Bible or hear of the love of Jesus for the first time. It is not difficult to find people who are willing and interested in studying the Bible in their homes. The Russian people are very kind, generous, and hospitable. Their depth of love and concern for others makes it possible to develop close bonds of friendship easily.

There is an urgent need for long term workers in Moscow and other Russian cities. While good can be accomplished through short trips, the brethren in Moscow need the consistency of teaching that can only come from long term workers. Dan Tholen and Mike Garth have decided to stay in Moscow until next summer, but who will follow? Metropolitan Moscow exceeds 12 million people. Russia is a huge country, and Moscow is only one small part. There is more work than Dan and Mike can accomplish. The work will be served best by an effective blend of short term and long term workers.

Any Americans interested in working with the church in Moscow should contact the brethren and secure an invitation. The church in Moscow is an independent, autonomous congregation, and we must respect that. No one would dare to arrive uninvited on the doorsteps of an American church and tell them that they had arrived to work with them for a period of time. We should not treat our Russian brethren with any less respect.

It is perhaps a different situation if one is interested in doing evangelistic work independent of the church in Moscow. One certainly does not need the permission of the church in Moscow to evangelize in that city or anywhere else in Russia. One could work independently of them while worshipping with them. The point is that we need to show respect for the autonomy of the church in Moscow and not act as if they are dependent on Americans or overseen by American preachers or churches.

Likewise, no American has the authority to act as a “missionary clearinghouse” for the work in Moscow. The Christians in Moscow need to take the responsibility for their work and schedule times for teams of Americans to work with them. Those sincerely interested in working with the brethren in Moscow should correspond with them to deter-mine the most appropriate times to come and how they can be most effectively used.

Not every American is suited for the work in Moscow. To be effective in Moscow one must be willing to be inconvenienced without complaint. He must be willing to adapt to the cultural differences and live like a Russian. Flexibility is an important personal characteristic. One cannot expect to live like an American and be successful in Russia. If one is not an effective worker at home with the ability to easily communicate with strangers, Moscow is not the place to be. Those interested in working in Moscow should carefully and prayerfully search their hearts and motives to determine their sincerity and purity.

This is not meant to discourage Americans from making short term or long term commitments to the work in Moscow. It is simply meant to sound a word of caution.

The opportunities to teach the gospel in the Moscow region are limitless. Public schools are open to Americans (with or without teaching degrees) who are interested and willing to teach English and the Bible. They are quite pleased when the emphasis is on the Bible. Home studies are easy to arrange. Public transportation is easily accessible and efficient, making travel to schools and homes all over the city possible. Bible studies taught in English at Moscow State University are possible and easy to arrange. There are over 200 contacts from the Bible Correspondence Course to con-tact. Additional ads for the BCC would no doubt generate even more contacts. Ads placed in small town newspapers would be an effective way to get contacts in some of the smaller cities in the Moscow region. Training classes for the new converts are essential. The men need to be trained for leadership and public worship. Teacher training and personal work classes need to be conducted. Podolsk is but one example of the interest that can be found in the smaller cities surrounding Moscow. There is no shortage of work or possibilities, only a shortage of workers.

Life in Moscow is different and takes a period of adjustment, but it is not impossible or as difficult as one might think. Comfortable, well furnished flats are available and can be rented for any length of time. However, rent is no longer the bargain it once was. A family of four should budget $300 to $600 per month for rent. We have several contacts who are willing to help locate flats for Americans. It is possible to rent flats from people who will move out and turn the entire home over to you. Others simply rent out rooms and provide cooking facilities. The price of rent is escalating rapidly and one should allow a minimum of three months to secure a suitable flat for an acceptable price.

The Moscow public transportation system is the pride of the city. While it is sometimes quite crowded, it is efficient, safe, and reliable. There is no need for an automobile, and taxis need to be used only sparingly. Using a combination of buses, Metros (subway trains), and walking, it is possible to travel anywhere in the city. By American standards some walks are a bit long, so good walking shoes are a necessity.

Communication with other countries is quite slow, but possible. Mail service moves at a snail’s pace. We found it difficult and sometimes frustrating to get an overseas phone line. It was often necessary to call on weekends or between 12:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. Moscow time. It is fairly easy to communicate through a fax machine. Faxed messages can be received at the central telegraph office in central Moscow. This can consume a good bit of time, but the telegraph office is near McDonalds so the trip is worth the time and effort.

Food is easy to find and fairly cheap for Americans, but not so for the average Russian. There are no American type grocery stores in Moscow. Food can be purchased from venders and at “markets” throughout the city. The variety is not as great as Americans are accustomed to, but it is food on which one can live. In the absence of large refrigerators and pantries, it is necessary to shop quite often. Some items such as bread are often purchased every day. There are “hard currency” stores throughout the city which supply a limited amount of American type food at American prices. (I was able to find Sugar Smacks at one!)

Life in Moscow moves at a slower pace than in the United States. It takes longer to do everything in Moscow than it does here. Patience is a necessary virtue. The people are not as time conscious as we are. No one is considered late unless he arrives for an appointment 15 minutes past the designated time. Life for Americans in Moscow is different, a little more difficult, but not oppressive.

The door for the gospel is open. The Russian people are genuinely interested in things spiritual in nature and eternal in consequence. But, how long will the door remain open? The Russian Orthodox Church is hard at work trying to establish itself as the official state religion. If this happens, religious persecution and intolerance may once again return to Russia. The political situation is volatile. Historically the Russian people have turned to strong individual leaders at times of crisis. If this happens the character of such a leader will determine the degree of religious freedom tolerated. The door is now open. We must take advantage of it while we can.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 1, p. 20
January 7, 1993

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

In the current furor over “gay rights,” there seems to be a concerted effort to brand anyone opposed to homosexual behavior as bigots still living in the Dark Ages. We are constantly bombarded with calls to wipe out bigotry and to be more tolerant of people different from us, regardless of the source or nature of that difference.

It is becoming ever more politically expedient to cater to the “gay rights” cause. Our new president-elect promises swift action to overturn the ban on homosexuals in the military. This will force all military personnel to consider all the gays to be just one of the guys. To do otherwise will be to condone bigotry.

Efforts are also underway to ban discrimination against homosexuals in housing, jobs, and other areas. The goal is to force the American public to grant to “gays” all the rights and protection that are rightfully granted to racial and ethnic minorities. The propaganda mills and the liberal news media are working overtime to depict the opposition to this movement as bigotry. Our educational system, in many in-stances, is conditioning our children to accept anyone regardless of his “race, color, or “sexual preference.”‘

Religious groups are being pressured to get in step with modern society by accepting “gays,” not only as members, but into their leadership. Any group who makes any kind of gesture in that direction is generally, and often generously, praised by the news media for being enlightened and progressive. Such efforts are considered as just another step away from the bigotry of the past.

All of this has caused me to ask, sometimes out loud, “Does the Bible condone bigotry? Were some of those we read about in the Bible bigots? Is God a bigot?” The answer is “yes” — if opposition to “gays” and their perverse lifestyle makes one a bigot.

God destroyed Sodom, a city with the dubious distinction of having a sin named for it. The nature of her prevailing sin is learned from reading Genesis 19. On the eve of her destruction, two angels in the form of men were guests in the home of Lot, Abraham’s nephew. That night, the Bible says, “The men of Sodom, both old and young, all the people from every quarter, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot and said to him, `Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may know them carnally”‘ (vv. 4-5). To protect his guests, Lot offered the men what he considered a lesser evil — his two virgin daughters. This did not appease this “gay” mob. In verse 9, they just told Lot to “stand back!” and accused him of keeping on acting as a judge (v. 9). I guess they thought he was some kind of bigot. But God made good his threat to destroy the city. It went up in smoke. Was God a bigot?

In giving the law of Moses, God included a ban on homosexual conduct. He said, “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them” (Lev. 20:13). Was God a bigot in commanding such? Was Moses a bigot for passing it on to Israel?

Paul wrote, “For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. . . . Who, knowing the righteous judgments of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them” (Rom. 1:26,27,32).

Again he wrote, “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9).

Was Paul a bigot? Paul said, “These things we (Paul and other inspired men — eob) also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches” (1 Cor. 2:12,13). He also said that the things that he wrote were the commandments of the Lord (1 Cor. 14:37).

Are the biblical writers, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit to be charged with bigotry? Certainly not! Neither should anyone who follows their teaching on the moral issue of homosexuality.

Does God love the “gay” person? Of course, He does. He also loves the drunkard, the thief, the murderer and the heterosexual fornicator. Jesus died for them and all other sinners. If they will meet the Lord’s conditions of salvation they can be washed from their sins in the blood of Christ. When they do this, their guilt is removed. They are no longer unrighteous, but made righteous by the mercy of God. They are washed, sanctified and justified “in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:9-11). One of the conditions for all of this is repentance. God does not accept them “just as they are” without any change of heart and behavior. Until people turn from their ungodly conduct, they have no right to expect the same “rights” as those who do not practice such sins against God and society.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 1, p. 13
January 7, 1993

By Randy Cavender

Jesus said in Luke 13:3,5, “I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.” Repentance is demanded of those who would come to God. According to the Lord, if one is not willing to repent, he will be lost. I am afraid that many overlook this command that Christ has given. Some do not know what it means, and it is rarely demanded of sinners anymore. Thus, what is repentance? It is important? Should it be demanded of those who are in sin?

Let us begin with defining repentance. Repentance is “to have another mind” (Young’s Analytical Concordance); “to change one’s mind, used esp. of those who, conscious of their sins and with manifest tokens of sorrow, are intent on obtaining God’s pardon, to change one’s mind for the better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one’s past sins” (Thayer). Thus, when one repents he has changed his mind from serving sin, to serving God. This repentance is produced by godly sorrow (2 Cor. 7:8-10). As one changes his mind this leads to a changed life in which he serves God (Lk. 3:8; Matt. 21:28-30). Let us accept what the New Testament teaches us concerning repentance and apply it to our lives.

Is repentance important? You be the judge! Jesus said, “I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.” When preaching to the Athenians, Paul taught that God, “now commands all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). In Peter’s second epistle he reminded his readers that God, “is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9). The inescapable conclusion is this: if one does not repent, he cannot be saved. This is exactly what the New Testament writers were conveying to our minds. To deny the importance of repentance is foolish indeed. We should just accept the fact that God expects his people to follow all of his commandments.

Should repentance be demanded of sinners? Most assuredly, yes! Jesus, in giving the Great Commission, told the apostles that they were to preach the gospel to every creature (Mk. 16:15). In Luke’s account of the Commission, Jesus said, “and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Lk. 24:47). In keeping with the will of God we must preach to sinners that they must repent. In keeping with this command of the Son of God the apostle Peter said, “Repent, and let everyone of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” “Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord” (Acts 2:38; 3:19). It is increasingly evident that we have not taught people that they must repent of their sins in that they are “baptized” and still remain in their sins. Paul dealt with this problem by asking, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?” (Rom. 6:1-2) When people truly repent they change their minds concerning sin and then, as a result, they practice righteousness.

Kind friend, Jesus said, “unless you repent you shall all likewise perish.” The choice is yours, you can repent or perish. Have you repented of your sins?

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 1, p. 19
January 7, 1993