Truth Magazine

By Jimmy Tuten

Introduction:

A. It is said that a very beautiful statute of a Greek slave girl once stood in the market place of an Italian city. The statue represented the girl as a neat well dressed young lady. One day a dirty, ragged little girl found the statue and for a long time stood and gazed at it with admiration and awe. She went home and washed her face and combed her hair. Before long she went to the market place again and admired the statue. She went home and washed her clothes. Each time she stood before the statue she found desirable qualities to emulate, and finally she was an entirely different girl.

1. As we behold Jesus in his word with no interposing obstructions we are transformed from the image of our worldly idols into the image of Christ (2 Cor. 3:18).

2. Inasmuch as “the issues of Life” are out of the mind (Prov. 4:23), transformation must begin in the mind (Phil. 4:8).

3. There is a whole curriculum for the mind given (Phil. 4:8).

4. The only religion that can save your soul and show to others the way of salvation is the one that “reflects upon the world the rays of the Sun of Righteousness, through a loyal discipleship that has discovered that life becomes resplendent when Jesus Christ is believed in and loved” (A.Z. Conrad).

5. We must be mindful of the fact that even unspiritual people know whether or not we live close to Jesus (Acts 4:13).

B. Today we wish to look at the Christian and his transformation (Text).

1. This is the second phase of Christian service in relation to self that calls for self-sacrifice (12:1-2).

2. The body is offered to God so that we be not conformed to the world (vv. 1-2a); the mind is renewed so that we may be transformed (2b).

C. We offer to God our bodies as a “living sacrifice”:

1. It is not offered to self so that one lives as he wishes or does his own thing.

2. It is not offered to others such as a spouse, family member, companion, sexual partner, mistress, or employer.

3. Nor is it offered to something else such as houses, boats, cars, jobs, possessions, professions, recreation, retirement, etc.

4. It is a living sacrifice because:

a. It is to be constant, continuous and not occasional.

b. It is to be sacrificed wherever that body is for it is not dependent upon place.

c. It sacrifices its own desires and life for God.

d. This sacrifice lives for God daily by serving him. This very thing Christians seek (1 Cor. 6:20;.2 Cor. 5:9). They know that life does not exist for this life alone. It has a more supreme purpose, i.e., its resurrection some day.

D. Too, there is a contrast of kingdoms in existence: one is fleeting, the other eternal; one is carnal, the other is spiritual; one appeals to the flesh, the other to the spirit; one leads to destruction, the other to life eternal. We should be impressed with this sobering fact: there is a wide difference between the world from which we have been translated and the kingdom into which we have been placed (Col. 1:13).

Body:

I. “Be Not Conformed To This World.”

A. Before defining “conformed” let us note two passages:

1 . Romans 12:2. We are to turn away from our past (do not be conformed to this world). We are to be “transformed” (our manner of life is to be changed).

2. Romans 8:29.- We shall be conformed to the Lord Jesus Christ at his coming.

3. The two words are thus used in connection with Past, Present and Future (I Thess. 1:9-10, this passage displays all three).

B. “Conformed” defined: Gr. sunschematizo, from the root schema which means fashion, the outward form, the appearance of a man. It is the appearance that changes from day to day and year to year. (Example: a man dresses differently for work than he does when he comes into the assembly to worship. A man looks different as a young man than he does as an older man. His schema, his fashion, his outward appearance changes.) Webster defines it: “to make or be like.” Illustration: The chameleon has the ability to change its skin color rapidly by conforming to its surroundings. It has come to symbolize a fickle and changeable person. God’s people are to be steadfast (1 Cor. 15:58).

1. We are cautioned in Scriptures not to be like the world (1 Jn. 2:15-17).

2. When one conforms to the world he becomes a part of a mass “herd,” losing individuality and denies himself self-expression. He’s just another lost sinner.

3. Illustration: Compare 1 Cor. 10:2 and Rom. 6:3, with special note to the fact those “baptized into Moses” came under his leadership, i.e., they committed themselves to him. Those who refused to obey him were destroyed, “overthrown in the wilderness.” Even so, in being baptized into Christ one’s past life is changed. Having been delivered from those sins we commit ourselves to him and are obligated to a transformation of the pattern of our lives (1 Cor. 10:5-11). This is the essential meaning of conversion: to turn from one belief or course to another. A definite, decisive adoption of a transformed life.

4. Even so, Romans 12:1-2 admonishes us to be “transformed” and not “conformed to this world.” One thing is certain, the pay may not be what we would want, but the benefits of such dedication are out of this world.

C. “World” defined: Gr. aion, age, the appearance of the world, not the universe (Rom. 1:20), material resources (Matt. 16:26), or necessarily the people (Jn. 3:16). It is the general course, way of life, the sphere of evil, including everything contrary to the spiritual (1 Jn. 2:16; 1 Pet. 1:14-15). Cf. R.C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, 204.

1. Fashions in the world change and what seems good in it is not always fashionable in the spiritual. (Mack-Levine Hat Company, St. Louis changes their hat style for men each year and I found that the changes did not always suit my taste.) The problem with some Christians is that they have been watching the wrong fashion shows!

2. Furthermore the very fashion and appearance of the world seems lasting, permanent, unending; it seems to offer the very best of everything: pleasure, happiness, fulfillment, satisfaction, etc. These things are for a “season” (Heb. 11:24-25; 1 Cor. 7:31).

3. But, the fashion of the world is a lie, a mask, or a masquerade in that the appearances have within them the seeds of corruption: selfishness, greed, bitterness, hatred, anger, ungodliness, war, division, savagery, deceitfulness, ignorance, etc.

4. That some in the body of Christ have conformed to some degree is seen in their conduct toward others in the body of Christ. Without scruples, it seems, they bite and devour one another, and treat them with less courtesy than they would business associates, etc.

(continued next outline)

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 21, pp. 651-652
November 1, 1990

By Don R. Hastings

Censorship, which promotes good, virtuous character and condemns perversive thoughts, words, and conduct is good and desperately needed in our nation. There is a strong movement in our nation to ban all censorship. Laws are being removed, or ignored, which once made it illegal to sell pornography on records, in movies and in books. Laws, which prohibited homosexuals from living anywhere they wanted and holding any job they desired, are being repealed. The killing of unborn babies has been legalized and vocally defended. The morality of this nation is deteriorating and censorship is not the cause, but a lack of censorship is!

The Tampa Tribune printed an article written by a staff writer. This article was published on the front page of the July 23, 1990 issue. The article was about the opposition to various kinds of obscene, polluting activities in the state of Florida, such as: 2 Live Crew’s album entitled, “As Nasty As They Wanna Be”; T-back bathing suits; pornography which hides under the word “art”; etc. The reporter quoted far more from those who censored the censors than those who rebuked the contaminators of morals. Some of the pictures used at the top of the article were obscene. It is disgraceful that the newspaper would print pictures of women who have no clothing covering that part of the anatomy upon which one sits. The news on television often reports, with pictures and words, stories about adult book stories, prostitution, nude-bar establishments, etc.

Those, who abhor censorship, claim that they have the right to say whatever they want to because the First Amendment gives them the right. The First Amendment gives Americans the right to freedom of speech, but this freedom is not unlimited! For example, one does not have the right to lie. We still have laws which prohibit lying under oath and misrepresenting products and services. It is a great abuse of the First Amendment to say it gives the vile and vulgar-mouthed person the right to spew forth his profanity anywhere he chooses and we must remove ourselves and our children from the sound of his words! A person has the right to express an opposing view, but let him do it with intelligent words which reveal his good, logical arguments. Filthy language is never uplifting, but always downgrading. Freedoms, which are abused and misused, will be taken away!

In the newspaper article, a faculty member at the University of South Florida’s sociology department, said, “We don’t have any idea if (pornography) has any impact on behavior.” Isn’t that statement amazing! People spend billions of dollars on pornography and this professor of sociology doesn’t know if it influences one’s behavior. If people aren’t affected by it, why look as it? Surely we must acknowledge that what we think has a tremendous influence on our behavior! It is what is in the “heart,” or mind, that determines what we say and do. (Read Proverbs 23:7; Matthew 13:34-37; 15:1820.) Those, who advertise their products, know that it is important to get their message into your mind. Pornography encourages violent sexual acts, such as: rape, child molestation; incest; etc.

The reporter quoted a faculty member at the University of Florida speaking about the First Amendment as a platform, “If you take the platform away, we’re no better than a police state.” It is not true, that one who objects to using the First Amendment as a right to justify the publishing of pornography is advocating the abolishing of the First Amendment. I am not a Communist or a defender of it! I love America and her freedoms. It is not those, who speak out against every form of moral pollution who are a threat to this nation, but those who want to engage openly, and freely, in sinful activities without being censored for it!

Many want the freedom to fill their minds and lives with wicked thoughts, words and deeds. They want to say, and do, whatever they please, but they don’t realize that they are enslaved to sin. Jesus said, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Everyone one that committeth sin is the bond servant of sin” (Jn. 8:34). Real freedom is found in Christ for there we must live apart from sin (Jn. 8:31, 32). Real freedom is freedom from: a defiled conscience; enslaving habits (smoking, drinking alcohol, cursing, gambling, drugs, etc.); ignorance; an uncontrolled temper; shame; penalty of sin; hopelessness; Satan’s captivity; etc.

When man rebels against God’s laws and makes his own, which give him the legal right to fulfill his evil desires by doing that which is “right in his own eyes,” society will suffer greatly! Wickedness perverts one’s character by causing one to be: selfish; uncaring about others; insensitive; dishonest; cruel; full of wrath; lacking in mercy, kindness, and love; unjust; without natural affection for one’s family; full of pride so that it causes him to think that he does not have to give account to anyone for the way he behaves; etc.

Will you stand up for what is morally good or be cowardly silent? If the silent majority doesn’t speak up soon, it will be too late to oppose perversion! Edmund Burke said, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 21, p. 653
November 1, 1990

By Clinton D. Hamilton

Sometimes questions are sent in with elaborative comments in order to present the context from which they are asked. There may be a point or issue that the querist desires to have addressed that does not immediately surface from the question itself. Although the question to be responded to in this column is relatively brief and can be answered with few words, the context in which the question is raised calls for extended remarks in relation to what the Bible says on a broad spectrum relative to the sexual issues in the question, as articulated by the querist.

Question: Please explain 1 Corinthians 7:34 “authority over each other’s body” and Hebrews 13:4 “the marriage bed undefiled.”

Reply: The term rendered power or authority, depending on the translation, in 1 Corinthians 7:4 is exousiazo. It occurs twice in verse 4 and two other times in the New Testament: Luke 22:25 and 1 Corinthians 6:12. Basically, the word means to exercise authority or power over.

It means “to be master of any one, exercise authority over one” (Thayer). In Luke 22:25, reference is to the kings of the Gentiles. In 1 Corinthians 6:12, the context is what he may have the liberty or right to do personally he may not choose to do in some contexts in relation to others. In this case, one is not to let one’s desire for doing it possess him so as to be compelled to do it because what may be lawful may not be expedient.

Sumphero is the term from which expedient is translated. It means “to help, be profitable, be expedient” (Thayer). It is used transitively only once in Acts 19:19 and referred to bringing the books together to be burned. Its other uses are intransitively. It is for our profit that Jesus went away from the earth (Jn. 16:7). We are chastized for our profit (Heb. 12:10). Sumphero is the word in these passages. Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:12 says it may not be to one’s profit or help to be controlled by desires. Paul said that he was not going to be brought under their domination. A lawful thing is not to deprive him of his liberty so as to be controlled by it. Rather, he will exercise his authority by choosing what he shall do.

Now back to 1 Corinthians 7:4. Exousiazo in this passage means “to be master of the body, i.e. to have full and entire authority over the body, to hold the body subject to one’s will” (Thayer). Contextually, Paul says that because of fornications each man should have his own wife and each woman should have her own husband (v. 2). Being married, both the man and the woman have a mutual obligation: each is to let the other control his/her body for the purpose for which they are married. One of these purposes is to avoid fornication (v. 3). If either of the marriage partners does not have access to the other’s body, then there would be the danger of fornication.

This power over the other’s body is for the lawful sexual intercourse which God provided in marriage. It cannot be stretched to include all manner of sexual fantasies that one may want to satisfy. The point of the passage is to exercise authority or control over one’s marriage companion so as to satisfy the sexual drive one might have through the sexual intercourse for which their bodies are suited by the design of the Creator. To read into the text the power for one’s companion to do what is beyond the point and scope of the design of the passage is to misinterpret and misapply the word of God.

Clearly, what is under consideration is the obligation that a marriage companion has to the spouse: to provide the body for the satisfaction of the sexual drive of the other through sexual intercourse. The sexual organ of each is designed for the other. This clearly is what is in view in verse 4. Each is to yield his or her body to the other at the other’s control. This cannot be pushed to include uses which are not under view.

Verse 5 contemplates that there may be times when by mutual consent there is deprivation or lack of sexual intercourse in order to provide leisure for prayer. However, they are to come together again for sexual intercourse lest Satan tempt them for want of self-control. Absences may occur for any number of reasons. During these, self-control of both the mind and the body is the proper behavior. Certainly, for brief periods companions should be able to do this.

Jesus taught that men can make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 19:12). The idea is that one should exercise self-control in order to conform to the will of God. This is possible; otherwise, Jesus would have been instructing them to do what they did not have the power to do.

The querist asks also for an explanation of Hebrews 13:4 concerning the bed undefiled. The expression in the Greek text is koite amiantos. The instruction is an exhortation: let marriage be honorable in all and the bed undefiled. Fundamentally, Christians are exhorted to hold marriage in the esteem and honor that are suggested by its initiation by God. He made woman for man and they are to be one flesh (Gen. 3:24; Matt. 19:5-6), which refers to sexual union in intercourse (compare 1 Cor. 6:16) that should occur only in marriage as authorized by God.

Amiantos means not defiled, unsoiled (Thayer). Used in this passage (Heb. 13:4) with koite it means pure, free from adultery (Thayer). Koite means “a place for lying down, resting, sleeping in; a bed, a couch; spec., the marriage bed” (Thayer). Used in the plural in Romans 13:13, it means sexual intercourse (Thayer) and is translated chambering in both the King James and the American Standard versions of the Bible.

The “bed undefiled” means that one reserves sexual intercourse to his or her spouse in the marriage bed. That bed is not to be defiled by adultery. Alford in his Greek Testament translated Hebrews 13:4 as follows: “Let your marriage be (held) in honour in all things and your marriage bed be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers, God shall judge.” If the warning is that God will condemn fornicators and adulterers, it is clear that Paul is talking about the absence of adultery in marriage in the exhortation to keep the bed undefiled. Among all things that Christians honor, there should be marriage and it should be held in honor in all its aspects.

What is under view here in the exhortation is sexual intercourse in bed. In particular, it is not to have intercourse that is unlawful or illicit (fornication or adultery). The act of intercourse and whether it is authorized or prohibited is the focus of the exhortation. To read into the passage what people may do in connection with intercourse is to do violence to the intent, language, and context of the passage.

In connection with authorized intercourse, so long as the two marital companions engage in nothing against nature, there would be no prohibition. But one does not learn this from Hebrews 13:4. Homosexuality, lesbianism, and similar sins are condemned (Rom. 1:24-27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10). These are against the design God has for men. These sins are against the nature of man who is to be one flesh with the spouse to whom the person is joined by God. The sexual organs should be used for the purpose for which they were created. This is according to their nature.

Within the authorizations of Scripture, there are words, dress, and movements that one might use to enhance the excitement of sexual union. However, whatever is done must be within the confines of what is natural and not suggestive of doing evil. The querist commented in elaborations accompanying the request for explanations of the passage with which I have dealt that the Song of Solomon is a very sensual book. Indeed it is. The purpose of the book is to show the beauty and joy of wedded bliss and the imagination that should enliven it. The metaphors and similes of the book show how the lovers thought of one another.

It should be observed that the mind’s imagination is that which ignited the excitement of the emotions in the Song of Solomon. Some might ask, “What about sex manuals?” If the purpose of the manual is to assist people in doing what is right, there probably is no wrong in reading them. However, one should not meditate on and be influenced by that which, if allowed, would lead to a violation of the will of God. If two people really love one another and communicate this emotion both in words and deeds, and if they are truly considerate of one another, they do not need manuals to do what God designed them by nature to do.

Whatever one may do in connection with sexual intercourse would need to be done within the will of God. Every act one does must also be with the full approval of the conscience. If there is doubt about the rightfulness of what is done, the thing done is a sin because we are instructed, “and whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23b). If one doubts what is being done, then he or she is condemned because it is not done in good conscience (Rom. 14:23a).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 21, pp. 645-646
November 1, 1990

By Wilbert Garingo Enostacion

On July 16, 1990, Monday afternoon, at exactly 4:26 (DST), Luzon was shaking! The tremor was felt at intensity 7.7 according to Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHILVOLCS). Huge buildings collapsed like an accordion. Non-retrival of bodies trapped inside collapsed buildings in Baguio City, Cabanatuan City in Nueva Ecij a, Dagupan City in Pangasinan and in the towns of Agoo, Aringay and Caba in LaUnion; had brought the once fresh and consoling air into an odorous air of funeral parlors! In the once tourist spot and “summer capital” of the Philippines, Baguio City, people were seen fleeing like rats, as the aftershock were felt stronger. Roads were buried under tons of mud and rocks in outlying areas where multiple landslides occurred.

The death toll of the killer quake reached to 1,999 as of August 10; the number is increasing as an account of deaths were unknown in many areas.

Though deaths were numberless in this calamity, brethren were spared in all places. No direct victims suffered casuality. However, the after-effect of it does. A sister in Caba lost a child during evacuation when the baby got sick of pneumonia. Based on reports given by brethren, these are the informations needed to be disseminated to all.

Baguio City and Cabanatuan City suffered the most tragic disaster, but no lives of brethren were reported lost. Froilan Nishiss house suffered the worst damage. Andrew Gawe’s four-door owned apartment suffered crackings and broken glasses. In Cabanatuan City and other parts of Neuva Ecija, many lost livelihood caused by the quake.

Faustino dela Cruz of Urdaneta reported that in Pangasinan area, three brethren lost homes when their houses were buried in the mud and flood waters. The same in Tarlac, Dominador Arcega of San Manuel reported that a dam was forcibly opened by the quake and flood waters flowed to houses killing some of the brethren’s working animals.

When the news of the quake reached U.S. brethren, worries on their minds were evident. First to call to seek information regarding the plight of the Filipino brethren was John Humphries of Louisville, Kentucky. He called Noli H. Villamor. Noli in return called this writer to assess the damage caused by the quake to the brethren. Within twenty-four hours, a full report was given to Noli to be relayed to John.

Brother Humphries disseminated the tragic event to some U.S. churches. Somehow, some concerned U.S. brethren immediately responded; however a multitude of them were reluctant. Maybe this was so because, in the past calamities that struck the islands, solicitations by U.S. brethren went into the pockets of some unscrupulous preachers, victimizing the victims!

However, as the day changed to night, and night into day, time has changed from bad to good. At present time, benevolent funds should and will be thoroughly documented to avoid any suspicions from brethren. Every check coming, will be distributed to the needy brethren; bearing the names of brethren, and signed by any preachers; then it will be reported to the sender. To anyone who wanted to know on this style, feel free to contact these men mentioned below this column.

U.S. brethren who have sent immediate assistance were (as of this writing): Connie W. Adams ($200 dollars): it was distributed to the brethren in Santiago sur, Caba, LaUnion. Complete report was submitted to him.

Taylorsville church, Louisville, Kentucky ($200 dollars) was given to a sister whose child died during the evacuation, a member of the Caba church.

Cecil Willis ($100 dollars): it was distributed to the brethren in Aringay.

Though not adequate, it helps in a small way. These were the funds that was received for the brethren in LaUnion. Other places, such as Pangasinana and Tarlac, need financial assistance also to reconstruct their houses and livelihood.

This article was written in behalf of the Filipino brethren who need immediate assistance from U.S. brethren. In this time of need, please open your hearts to the plea of assistance. The aftershocks continue to bring havoc to many saints, especially the after-effects caused by the quake, Prices of prime commodities have zoomed up high to the sky! Gasoline pulled down many into submittance. Rebuilding of houses is not easy as prices of lumber, wood, nails, etc., have gone up after the quake.

Any assistance that can be afforded, please send to those whom you trust most to be disseminated to the poor saints in the Philippines. Please send it via registered airmail to avoid losses on the way. As benevolent funds may continue to flow, reports need updating.

Any of you brethren, can contact for further information and to where the funds should be sent the men listed below. Call them today.

Connie W. Adams, phone: (502) 957-2257 Brooks, Kentucky

John Humphries, phones: (502) 499-9942 or 239-0990 Louisville, Kentucky

Cecil Willis, phone: (409) 642-1456 Woodlake, Texas

In the Philippines, contact: Atty. Noli H. Villamor, phone: 61-66-43 Manila

We thank you all brethren for your deep concern to our needs in this dark hour. Perhaps, the Lord will grant you more material blessings to share with God’s people in your service to the Master. May the words of the Apostle John linger in our minds: “But whoever has the world’s goods, and beholds his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him? Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue but in deed and truth” (1 Jn. 3:17-18).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 20, pp. 628-629
October 18, 1990