Truth Magazine

By Lewis Willis

One of our elders told me that there was a need for some teaching to be done on the subject of dancing. I decided to write an article about it. If you parents feel there is a need for this teaching in your family, sit your children down in the quietness of your home and read and study this material with them.

Many New Testament passages speak of lasciviousness as evil and sin. It seems appropriate, first of all, to list some of these:

1. Mark 7:21-23: “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.”

2. 2 Corinthians 12:21: “And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.”

3. Galatians 5:19: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness. “

4. Ephesians 4:17-19: “This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.”

5. 1 Peter 4:3: “For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries.”

It is evident from these passages that whatever lasciviousness is, it is sinful, unacceptable practice as far as God is concerned.

So, what is lasciviousness? The Greek word is the word aselgeia. W.E. Vine defines aselgeia in this way: “. . denotes excess, licentiousness, absence of restraint, indecency, wantonness; . . . The prominent idea is shameless conduct” (Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 310). When Thayer defines aselgeia, he gives several synonyms, all of which describe a conduct regarded as unlawful with God. Here is his list: “unbridled lust, excess, licentiousness, lasciviousness, wantonness, outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence. ” He calls it “carnality. “However, the most appropriate thing he says, and that which applies to our present inquiry most directly, is this: He says that lasciviousness is “wanton (acts or) manners, as filthy words, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males and females, etc.” (Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, pp. 79-80). These are simply definitions of the Greek word which appeared in the passages cited above, and they are very revealing to anyone searching for Truth. If you would like to read further on this word and its applications, I recommend a tract by Weldon Warnock which is available through the bookstore, entitled “A Work of the Flesh: Sexualism,” pp. 8-12.

I do not know how dancing could be more directly referred to than to describe it as “indecent bodily movements” and as “unchaste handling of males and females. ” It is my view that one lacks honesty who questions that dancing involves these two things. All one needs to do is look and he can see that such is exactly what is taking place. If not, that is, if you cannot see this, I suggest that you take the same actions involved in dancing, turn the lights down low and stop the music to which you are dancing, and let your Dad walk into the room and observe what is going on and see what he thinks about it.

Is dancing a sin? Absolutely, it is! Dancing involves people in the sin of lasciviousness and, as Paul said, “. . . they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (Gal. 5:21). Young people, when you decide to dance, remember what you are giving up. You are giving up Heaven if you do. Are you willing to pay that price to move your body around indecently and to have someone handle you in an unchaste, impure way? Why not obey God instead and “abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thess. 5:22)?

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 7, p. 207
April 5, 1990

By Clarence W. Fell, III

What is the “eye of a needle” in Matthew 19:24? Have you ever wondered? Most of us have. I realize that this is not an earth shattering problem. It is just an intriguing puzzle that has aroused our curiosity now and then. Let’s take a brief moment to kick back, relax and consider this little brain teaser. I believe we can settle the question once and for all. Let’s see if you agree.

First, the two main positions are as follows:

A. A literal sewing needle.

B. A small gate in a wall for pedestrians.

The gate theory is the most popular position held today. It is full of stirring imagery. It brings to mind a camel freed from its burden and down on its knees humbly crawling through the gate. The camel, of course, illustrates the rich man who must get free of his burden of riches and come crawling humbly on his knees to God.

Absolutely beautiful imagery isn’t it? I just get goose bumps thinking about it. But, goose bumps aren’t a safe way to settle even a small Bible question so let’s look at the text.

Consider the following pieces of the puzzle:

1. In vv. 16-22 the rich young ruler approaches Christ making inquiry about eternal life. Christ instructs this man to “go sell what you have and give to the poor.” At this the rich man goes away sorrowful because he did not want to part with his riches. He apparently wanted his wealth more than the eternal life he had inquired about.

2. In v. 23 Jesus takes advantage of this incident to teach his disciples about the danger of riches.

3. In v. 24 Jesus impresses the point on their minds by using the illustration of the camel and the eye of a needle.

4. In v. 25 we find that the disciples are “exceedingly amazed” and ask, “Who then can be saved?” This verse gives us a clue to the puzzle. If camels did actually go through these small gates, then why are the disciples “exceedingly amazed”? Why are they prompted to ask, “Who then can be saved?” Does it appear from the disciples’ response that they are thinking about a gate that camels do actually pass through?

5. In v. 26 Jesus said very simply and plainly, “with men this is impossible. ” Was it impossible for a camel to go through the gate in the wall? If we are going to teach that the “eye of a needle” is a gate then shouldn’t we change the impossible that Jesus spoke of to possible?

I agree that a literal sewing needle does not stir up much thrilling imagery or emotions, but we’re going to have to bite the bullet on this one. It is impossible for man, without God, to be saved whether he be rich or poor, just as impossible as it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a literal sewing needle. But with God even the impossible becomes possible and the camel can pass through the eye of a literal sewing needle, if God so desires, and man can be saved.

So what do you think? Is the “eye of a needle” a gate or a literal sewing needle?

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 7, p. 197
April 5, 1990

By Vernon Love

The unity of all Christians is one of the supreme subjects of great importance in the New Testament. There are many scriptures that command and believers to be “one.” Therefore “division is sinful.”

When the “household of Chloe” told Paul about the divisions at Corinth (1 Cor. 1:11), Paul commanded the church to be no longer divided. Division is sinful.

The apostle Paul said, “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10).

Was This a Command to the Corinthians?

The word “beseech” means to “beg, plead, or implore.” The Greek word is parakaleo and means “invite, plead, call to, intreat, or exhort.” This makes this verse very important when the plea comes from the apostle Paul. But, Paul invokes, not his authority but the authority of Christ when he said “by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Therefore, we know Paul was not making a suggestion or hinting that they need to be “one” but was commanding them to be “one.” He told them the solution to their division when he said, “that ye all speak the same thing.” They were able to “unite” by following only Christ and stop following men.

What Is the Fruit of Unity?

When we consider the “fruit of unity” it should cause every believer never to do anything that would cause division. Paul said, “that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10). This does not sound like they could “take it or leave it.” They were commanded to be “one.” If this church could stop their divisions by all “speaking the same thing,” then it is obvious this will also work today. Paul said, “Is Christ divided?” The answer was well known at Corinth and it is known today. But, divisions still exist, even among those who claim to be members of the body of Christ.

The Importance of Unity

It seems that many have forgotten the importance of unity. It was so important that Jesus prayed this prayer, “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as thou Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me” (Jn. 17:20-21).

How can anyone read this great prayer of our Lord and suggest it is right to divide into “denominations”? How can any Christian, a member of the body of Christ, suggest that we can do anything we want to do, even if there is objection from other members of the church?

The “importance of unity” is that believers can be “one” and can work together. The world will see that the church is united and will know that Jesus was “sent by God.”

Division Always Comes From Men

History shows that man always promotes “division.” Israel divided when the ten tribes revolted and made Jeroboam their king (1 Kgs. 12:20). The church divided after the Bible was completed and we are still reaping the effects of division. Each year denominations spring up and promote their doctrines. Division never makes the church stronger; it always leads into apostasy. Division is sinful.

New Testament Churches Are to Practice Unity

The church at Rome was told, “We, being many, are one body in Christ and members one of another” (Rom. 12:5). He also said, “Be of the same mind one toward another” (Rom. 12:16). Corinth was commanded to be “one” (1 Cor. 1:10). He also said, “For by one spirit are we all baptized into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13). “Finally, brethren, fare well. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you” (2 Cor. 13:11). The church at Ephesus was to endeavor “to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3). The church at Philippi was told, “Only let your conversation be as becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel” (Phil. 1:27). The church at Colosse was commanded, “that their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love” (Col. 2:2). Peter said, “Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion, one of another; love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous” (1 Pet. 3:8).

Unity was preached to all the churches by Paul. “For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved Son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church” (1 Cor. 4:17).

Paul also wrote “commandments” to the churches. “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord” (1 Cor. 14:37).

Therefore, Paul always preached “unity” and condemned “division.” Division is sinful.

Unity In Worship But Division In Business Meetings

Most members are united on what the church must do in worship and will condemn any effort to bring in anything not found in the word of God. However, we are hearing of much division by brethren in business meetings. In matters of faith, in which the New Testament clearly states a “thus-saith-the-Lord” we should unite and never have any disagreement. In matters of expediencies, in which we must make a choice, we must also be united. However, we know where brethren would not agree so they let the majority make the decision. There is no matter that brethren cannot come to an agreement if they will treat one another as “brethren” and “members of the body of Christ.”

When unity is not practiced, division reigns. Brethren let their tempers get out of hand, even to the point of storming out of the meeting and slamming the door. We know of churches that have stopped having business meetings because members “fussed” too much. Many members will stop coming to these meetings because of the confusion that comes about. How can members read the New Testament and plead for “unity in religious matters” and then go in a business meeting and “fuss” and “feud”?

But as unity promotes Jesus as the Son of God (Jn. 17:21), be assured that “division” in business meetings always gets out in the community. The world will not come to the services when they hear “division” is being practiced. Let’s remember we are to be of “one mind and in one judgment” and to be “perfectly joined together” in all matters, not just in the worship service. Division is sinful.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 8, pp. 225, 248-249
April 19, 1990

By P.J. Casebolt

Age distinction can be a good thing; age discrimination can be a bad thing.

The same is true of sex distinction and discrimination. If we are to reap the benefits of the male/female relationship, we must first recognize and admit that there are certain distinctions to be made between males and females. Some are trying to ignore this fact, and any lawful effort to distinguish between male and female is branded as discrimination.

In the social sector, some progress has been made in the area of age discrimination, but we still have a long way to go. Arbitrary age limits are established for job, military, and educational qualifications, and if you are one year younger or older than the lower or upper limit, you are disqualified. In fact, you could miss the cut-off limit by even one day, and still be disqualified, depending on your birthday.

We may not have too much control over age discrimination in the social or civil sector of life, but we should be able to capitalize on the advantages which both the young and the elderly have to offer in the church. And, while preaching is not the only work to be done in the church, it may tend to illustrate our tendency to discriminate when it comes to the matter of age.

Under the law of Moses, certain age limits were established for service in the tribe of Levi, including those who served in the priesthood. It was not God’s idea to have kings ruling over his people in the first place, but certain restrictions were placed upon those kings. Yet, no age limits were established as to when a king’s reign was to begin or end. Some younger kings put some of the older ones to shame when it came to using common sense or obeying the Lord.

In this dispensation of time, we have a better covenant than the one which God made with Israel. We need to act accordingly.

Let me cite a real-life example of show how we sometimes discriminate against the youth of the church.

This particular young man has been preaching for a couple of years, and has the knowledge and poise of those who are much older. He is so young that he still has to have someone drive him to his preaching appointments, because he isn’t old enough to obtain a driver’s license. He often completes his newspaper route before going to preach at some area congregation. I remarked that he may be the only boy who ever had to make a choice between being a paper boy or a preacher.

While this young man is now receiving encouragement to develop his talents, the case illustrates my point. If you were to suggest sending a 15-year old boy to preach for a congregation which was not aware of his talents, he would be rejected on the basis of age alone.

On the other hand, if you suggested sending a 95-year old man to preach for the same congregation, under similar circumstances, that man would probably be turned down on the basis of his age. Yet, I knew a preacher who continued to preach at that age, whose physical stamina and mental alacrity would equal that of many preachers half his age.

Admittedly, these two “Alpha and Omega” examples are exceptions to the general rule, and yet they show how arbitrary we can be by not taking advantage of the youthful and elderly talents in the church.

I have known young preachers with years of experience and good recommendations who desired to preach, but were turned down because the brethren wanted “a more experienced man.” In some instances, the congregations had elders who could have continued to oversee the flock while giving a young man the opportunity to do the work of an evangelist. All too often, the younger preacher has to get his “on the job training” under some of the most difficult (and often disastrous) circumstances.

At the other end of the age discrimination spectrum, there are preachers who are still physically and mentally alert even at the threescore years and past, but still are hindered from fulfilling their potential because brethren have decided that anyone that old could not possibly meet their concept of what a preacher out to be.

When I first began to preach, several brethren thought that I was 10-15 years older than what I actually was. I just hope that some may think I am that much younger than what my birth certificate indicates. And, I have known brethren to miss a preacher’s age by that many years, just judging by appearance. I have also known brethren who thought a certain preacher had a college education when he had never even finished high school, and some who thought a preacher had not finished high school when in reality he held a college degree.

The apostle instructed a young preacher how to behave himself so that no one would despise his youth (1 Tim. 4:12). And, in all fairness to many brethren and congregations, age alone has not been a factor when considering men for the work of an evangelist. It certainly hasn’t been in my case, or if it has, I never knew about it.

Maybe Jack Benny had something when he kept telling folks he was 39 years old. Some preachers are either too young or too old to suit some brethren, but a middle-aged man (whatever that might mean), may still not have the other qualifications necessary to do the work of an evangelist.

We need to take advantage of the talents of youth, and the church is the ideal place to blend the zeal and energy of youth with the knowledge, wisdom, and restraint characteristic of older Christians (cf. 1 Tim. 5:1,2; Tit. 2:4). And, the beautiful thing about it is, we don’t have to start special organizations for either the young or old in order to capitalize on this rich resource of talent, The church and the home are still sufficient to this end.

It may be unwise at times not to recognize age distinction, but it may be just as unwise to practice age discrimination.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 7, pp. 206, 214
April 5, 1990