Truth Magazine

By John Smith

The Human Distinction (2)

Since we have the ability to reason, make choices and practice self-control, it is reasonable that we be held accountable for our actions. God is exceptionally clear in this regard (Ezek. 18:20; 2 Cor. 5:10).

There is no one else on whom we can blame our mistakes. Adam tried, but it didn’t work (Gen. 3:12). When we sin we stand guilty before the Lord. It’s not Mom and Dad’s fault, society’s fault, or your friend’s fault. It’s your own fault! We will live out the “reap what you sow” principle.

Human beings are to operate according to a system of morals and values. We have the ability to know right from wrong if our conscience has been properly trained (Heb. 5:14). God will judge us according to whether we have done good or bad (2 Cor. 5:10). He expects us to make proper use of our conscience and moral nature. This ability is not shared with the rest of creation. Only man, the best of God’s creation, can reason according to a moral standard, making decisions that respect the inherent value of their fellow human.

Values such as respect, self-control, honesty, responsibility and purity are rooted in God’s word and essential for proper relations with the opposite sex. Choices, regarding our sexuality, need to be made with respect for these values. For instance, will a young man or woman ask their partner to risk life-changing or life-ending consequences in order for them to have a few moments of pleasure?

In a recent national survey, a cross-section of young people were asked what influenced their sexual decisions. The results of this survey may surprise you. The number one influence was the morals and values that they had inherited from their parents. “Train up a child in the way that he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it” (Prov. 22:6).

As human beings we are to have commitment to and love for our mates. “Easy sex and one night stands” not only violate God’s laws, but also do insult to the nature of mankind. When man mates with whomever he can, hopping from bed to bed, he acts like an animal, not one made in the image of God.

God’s design for the human family is most respectful. In Matthew 19:4-6 God calls for one man for one woman for life. Husbands and wives are to love and serve one another (Eph. 5:21-23). Wives are told to learn to love their husband (Tit. 2:4). This is not some soft, soapy, sentimental, syrupy type of toe-tingling emotional response, but rather a learned, disciplined response to an imperfect man. They are look out for the best interests of one another while serving one another.

Finally, human beings are expected to take responsibility for their offspring. If a man won’t take care of his ow God declares that he has “denied the faith and is worse than infidel” (1 Tim. 5:8). Many young men today have lo sight of the fact that it doesn’t take a man to father a child but it does take a man to accept the responsibility of rearing the child he fathered. If you father a child or become a mother out of wedlock, you are expected by God to take on all the responsibility for the child’s well being. Are you ready for that?

Conclusion

Man was made in the image of God, but sadly many can not reflect it. There was a commercial a few days ago which several people were seen walking dogs that they resembled. While looking like a dog might be humorous acting like one is not.

Let us determine to live up to our design. Know that what we do make mistakes, God still loves us and desires our salvation. Don’t give up – turn to the Lord.

Guardian of Truth XXXV; 6, p. 164
March 21, 1991

By Max E. Tice

Since charismatic zealotry has been the rage of the last three decades, the need to grasp and defend God’s truth on issues related to the movement should be apparent to all disciples of Christ. Not only must we answer staunch devotees of the glossolalia (tongues-speaking) fad, we must also aid the unsettled querist as well. A quick and decisive response to arguments advocating the perpetuation of charismatic gifts may cool the fervor of some pseudo-gifted enthusiast or deter some honest inquisitor (possibly a brother in Christ) from falling prey to this mania.

Obviously, a complete expose of Neo-Pentecostal apologetics exceeds the bounds of the present study. Nonetheless, an inspection of one small portion of the charismatic dispute is a realistic objective. Attention will be centered upon one of the most debated passages in the controversy.

As most readers are aware, many brethren consider 1 Corinthians 13:8 one of the strongest proof texts attesting to the current cessation of supernatural gifts of the Spirit. Ironically, the charismatic camp considers it the opposite. Exponents of the latter movement see it as irrefutable evidence that these gifts are still operative among Christians today. Differences in perception of this crucial text result from disagreements over the identity of “that which is perfect” (v. 10). While many see it as a reference to completed revelation, others scoff at this position as ludicrous. They see it as a clear reference to Christ (the perfect one) or to the perfect age which he will usher in at his return.

As the two opposing sides meet, the conflict begins. A zealous brother may argue that the expression “that which” is not “he who” and, therefore, cannot be applied to Jesus. If he knows a little Greek, he may point out that this expression (to teleion) is also neuter in the original language. This may be met with the response that Matthew 1:20 and 1 John 1:1 plainly apply the neuter gender to Jesus [to and ho (nominative, singular, neuter of hos) respectively].

From here the battle may move to contextual considerations, The argument is made that the “perfect” does not necessarily refer to one’s character. It may be rendered as “the whole” or “complete.” Since it stands as the antithesis of partial knowledge and partial prophecy (v. 9), it is urged that Paul must have had complete revelation of knowledge and prophecy in mind. At this point, the opposing side rallies with what appears to be a powerful counterattack. It is time for the “unanswerable” passage. Verse 12 is brought into the discussion. The KJV renders the latter as follows:

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

The ASV, NASV, and NIV may seem to make this counterpunch even more devastating by rendering epignosomai as “I shall know fully.”

From this text the Neo-Pentecostal apologist now forges the following argument: “We do not yet see Jesus face to face. Neither do we fully know anything, much less know ourselves as God knows us. Therefore, the perfect has not yet come, and this means that miraculous gifts have not ceased.”

Well, is this the knockout punch? What can be said about verse 12? Although it has perplexed many Bible students, it is not the validation of present-day charismatic gifts which some think it is. The truth is that such arguments made off the verse demonstrate shallow analysis. First of all, Paul does not say one word about seeing Jesus or God face to face. The key to understanding the meaning is to take a closer look at the term “glass.” What kind of glass does Paul have in mind? The answer is – none at all. The Greek word for glass is esoptrou and means “mirror.” Since silvered glass was not invented until the 13th century, a modern-day mirror is not in view at all. The ancients used polished metal for mirrors. These gave imperfect reflections of objects, which is conveyed here in the term “darkly” (Greek: ainigmati). Thus, Paul has introduced an analogy which pictures early Christians looking into an imperfect mirror and seeing an imperfect reflection. Whose face would be in the mirror in this analogy? God’s? Christ’s? Of course not. Yet, the popular Pentecostal explanation has Paul and others looking into a mirror in order to see the literal face of Jesus or God? Incredible! The true meaning will be evident shortly.

Before saying more about the mirror, something should be said about the expression “know fully” which is used in many translations. This is an accurate representation of the Greek word. However, people often draw the wrong conclusion from it. It is often argued that nobody can know anything fully in this life. Thus, Paul must refer to a time after Christ’s return. This may sound impressive. However, it is inaccurate. The fact is that the Bible repeatedly uses this same Greek word translated “know fully” for knowledge we can have in this life. In Romans 1:32 Paul uses the word to describe the knowledge that the Gentiles had possessed of God’s moral law. In 1 Timothy 4:3 he uses it for the knowledge of truth which enables a person to give thanks for his food. Colossians 1:6 applies it to the knowledge of God’s grace which the Colossians already had. Peter uses it in 2 Peter 2:21 for knowledge of the way of righteousness which apostates possessed, but ignored in turning back to the world. Many other examples could be cited. However, this should suffice to demonstrate that the “know fully” argument is fallacious.

Finally, what is meant by knowing “even as I am known”? Many people assume that this refers to knowing God or to knowing ourselves as well as God knows us. Yet, the text says nothing about such an idea. An alternative explanation which better fits the context is to see this expression as the culmination of the mirror analogy. Other explanations render Paul’s statement as nonsensical. They have Paul introducing an analogy and then dropping it without ever making a point. On the other hand, if the words in question are seen as the completion of Paul’s picture, they make a great deal of sense. Consider the position of someone who had never seen his own face, except as reflected by a piece of polished brass. He would not know himself as well as everyone else who saw his face directly. If he could somehow get a clearer picture (as with our mirrors), he would see himself (externally) as others saw him. He would know that part of himself as he was known by other people. It would be a face-to-face meeting with self.

Someone may ask, “What is Paul’s point in such an analogy?” It is not that he will one day get to know himself better. What would this have to do with a context that is discussing the cessation of revelations, prophecies, and tongues? The point is that Paul would one day know something better than he knew it at the time 1 Corinthians was written. That something certainly could be completed revelation, no matter how much modern charismatic advocates scoff at the idea. This means that verse 12 does not prove that the “perfect” is yet to come.

Guardian of Truth XXXV; 5, pp. 147-148
March 7, 1991

By Keith Greer

“If we then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. . . Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry” (Eph. 3:1-5).

Many try to justify gambling by saying that they know when to stop. “I just set myself a $20 limit for the night. When that is gone, it is gone. It is just my entertainment. It is no different than going to the movies.”

Do most people know “when to stop”? Statistics would tell otherwise. There are many chapters of Gamblers Anonymous, not only in Las Vegas, but throughout the United States. Many young airmen at Nellis get into trouble because they get started gambling and don’t know when to stop. More than one young person has written bad checks thinking, “If I just play one more time, I’m going to win the big jackpot.”

Ask any gambler who has destroyed his home and turned to crime to support his gambling. Many start something that they cannot stop. Las Vegas has many “homeless” – many as a direct result of those who came to Las Vegas thinking that they were going to be the one to “strike it rich.” Rather than getting rich, they do not even have a bus fare home.

I get many calls at the building here every week from people who are in just such circumstances. I recently had a call from a Christian from Texas who had come here with his family and, even though his wife and children had pleaded with him, he spent two days “at the tables” and lost all of his money. He was crying and asked me to pray with him, not only for God to forgive him, but for the terrible example he had set for his family.

If you don’t care about yourself, think about this. “Just as teenagers are beginning to show signs of curtailing risky sex, illicit drug use and drunk driving, another potentially destructive behavior – gambling – is threatening to become the teen vice of the ’90s. . . The most popular forms of gambling among teenagers include betting on sports, card playing, lotteries and slot machines. . . For teen and other problem gamblers, betting fever may lead to serious crimes as well as self-destruction. . . The social and personal factors that cause compulsive gambling, such as widespread materialism and unstable families, continue unabated” (U.S. News & World Report, June 18, 1990, p. 51).

“But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control: against such there is no law” (Gal. 5:22-23).

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 6, p. 163
March 21, 1991

By Stan Adams

A few months ago, I was talking with a precious brother in Christ, who is a member of a black congregation nearby. He was concerned about the number of brethren where he attends who seem to have no concept of what repentance is, according to Scripture. He related that the same folks where coming up all the time, and “repenting” of the same thing. He told me how he had handled this, after it went on for several weeks. He told them one Sunday morning that he couldn’t judge anyone’s heart, and he was as willing as anyone to forgive, but that many of them were about to “wear the Lord out”! He told them that he wasn’t too sure whether they were “repenting or reporting.” He expanded on that and let them know that the Lord already knows what we have done, he doesn’t need a report. What the Lord wants us to do is to stop sinning and turn from our evil and not just tell him what we have done and then continue doing it over and over again. I told him I thought he handled it really well, and that I wish more brethren would wake up and see his point. Where he worships is evidently, not the only place where this confusion exists.

Brethren, like many of you, I have been observing many of the antics of some brethren with dismay and disappointment. There seems to be an attitude among many brethren, that “reporting” is enough. Even if they say they do not believe it themselves, many are more than willing and anxious to come to the aid of those who do hold this view. They refuse to speak out and stand firmly for what is right. I think the brother I spoke with, hit the nail on the head. “Reporting” is not enough. It is not scriptural for someone to simply admit to a sin (such as fornication, or unscriptural marriage), and then continue in it. It violates Romans 6:1,2; Matthew 3:8; 2 Corinthians 7:8-11, just to mention a few. Also, repentance carries the idea of not only turning from sin, but also turning to God. It is, if you please, an about face, ceasing from the sin, as well as regretting it.

We all know that the Lord is willing and able to forgive us, as often as we repent. However, he has not promised to forgive anyone for simply reporting.

Brethren, what has happened? Where is our common sense and militance toward error? Have we become, or are we fast approaching, a status as people who will tolerate anything? Will we sell our convictions simply because we admire someone? Will we refuse to preach the truth, on any subject, because it might be “controversial”? I hope that we will not become hirelings who will preach whatever pleases the people. We need to get back to plain old common sense preaching, and need to quit trying to impress folks with how “intelligent” we can be (you can’t fool people but so long, anyway). Brother Eric Norford related to me a statement that I think is great, that was made to him and other preaching students by Dee Bowman at Florida College. It went something like this: “Preaching that does not storm the will is not gospel preaching.” I think that is true. Gospel preaching should never be demoted to an exercise in ear-scratching. We should not shun to declare the whole counsel of God, anywhere we preach. It might mean that we will alienate close associates, or that we will lose support, or be fired, but we can sleep at night, and face ourselves in the mirror the next morning, with a clear conscience before God.

Foy Smith wrote in the Firm Foundation (Vol. 80, No. 5), some years ago, the following admonition:

Brother, roll up your sleeves and thunder forth that message that rocked the hills and vales around Jordan long ago that pierced the hearts and convicted thousands on the day of Pentecost and subsequent days – that vibrated through the hills and valleys of Kentucky and Ohio in the days of the restoration, and that still thrills and influences the hearts of men, when it is given its rightful place and emphasis! Preach it because you love it. Preach it because you are afraid not to preach it. Preach it exactly as it is written, neither fearing nor favoring men. Preach it every time you go into the pulpit like that time will be your last time. Preach it as a “dying man to dying men!”

I have this hanging on my wall in my study and I have made copies for three young preachers whom I have worked with. May we all develop more courage and stamina in preaching, and get back to the simple common sense approach to proclaiming truth.

“Repenting or reporting”? Some have already made their choice, for “reporting.” The only problem is, there is no Scripture for it. Don’t “wear the Lord out, brother!”

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 5, p. 135
March 7, 1991