Truth Magazine

A false doctrine is being taught in these words: “The Holy Scriptures teach the second coming of Christ, including the establishment of the eternal kingdom, the day of judgment, the end of the world and the resurrection of the dead, occurred with the fall of Judaism in 70 A.D.” Thus, we examine these false teachings:

• Christ Has Not Yet Come. John records, “Be- hold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him . . .” (Rev. 1:7). Those who believe Christ has already come should not partake of the Lord’s supper for the communion shows “the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Cor. l1:26). If Christ came in A.D. 70, then every person has already been eternally rewarded. “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works” (Matt. 16:27).

• The Establishment of the Kingdom Was Not in A.D. 70. The prophecy of Isaiah 2:2-3, Acts1:4, 8, Mark 9:1 was fulfilled in Acts 2 when Jews heard, believed, repented, and were baptized, “. . . and the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). This occurred about forty years before A.D. 70.

• End of the World and the Resurrection Did Not Occur in A.D. 70. The end of the world and the resurrection will take place at the last day. Martha said concerning her brother, Lazarus, “I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day” (John 11:24). To understand that the world did not end in A.D. 70, all one has to do is to look around and see that the world still turns! When the resurrection comes, “. . . all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:28-29). Go to any graveyard, look around and you will soon see that the dead have not yet been resurrected!

“The Bible and Gays” is an article by Deb Price of The Detroit News reprinted in The Louisville Courier-Journal advocating the homosexual idea that the Bible does not address homosexuality as a sin. This is wishful thinking at best, but the liberal press runs these articles attempting to sway the thinking of their readers. They know that if a lie is repeated often enough, people will begin to believe it, and a biblically ignorant generation will eventually accept it.

Ms. Price uses a man named Peter Gomes and his recently published book The Good Book: Reading The Bible With Mind And Heart to promote her liberal views on homosexuality. She says of the book by Gomes that it is “a welcome testament to his faith that we all can raise our level of biblical understanding by seriously studying modern scholarship as well as the Bible itself.”

One other short paragraph from the article will demonstrate the thrust of the editorial, and the view of some homosexuals who search for approval from God’s Word: “And despite all the Bible-thumping hoopla these days condemning gay people, the Bible says little about homo- sexuality. The Ten Commandments didn’t mention it; neither did Jesus, Gomes points out. Sodom’s downfall, he adds, wasn’t homosexuality. Old Testament authors referred to Sodom’s sins as ‘pride and selfishness.’ Jesus himself is under the impression that Sodom was destroyed because it was a place lacking hospitality, Gomes concludes from reading Matthew 10:14-15 and Luke 10:10-12.”

Ms. Price’s closing remark is, “If we open our minds as well as our hearts, it’s never too late to be transformed.” The Courier-Journal is known in the Louisville area as a paper that promotes many liberal ideas, but it seems especially dedicated to the homosexual movement. They have published articles and editorials with pictures illustrating the “normal” life that homosexuals lead in the Louisville area. They ran a special on gay bars and the gay lifestyle in the Scene section of the paper complete with addresses of each of the establishments and pictures of lesbians and homosexual men dancing together. This editorial by Deb Price is just another attempt to soften the public’s view toward this abomination.

What Saith The Scripture?

What saith the Scripture? As always, we must look to God’s word for the truth (John 17:17). It is not to be found in modern scholarship, The Courier-Journal, or any other human receptacle.

Let’s notice first the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. The Lord told Abraham before he destroyed these cities that their “sin is very grave” (Gen. 18:20). Now, all sin is bad and any one sin will keep a person out of heaven, but where in the Bible do we get the thought that inhospitality is an especially grave sin?

When the two angels, that appeared as men, entered Sodom, Lot met them and invited them into his home not knowing that they were angels (Gen. 19:1-2). He brought them into his house, fed them, and provided beds for them (Gen. 19:3-4). These angels found a hospitable home in Sodom.

While the angels were enjoying the hospitality extended to them by Lot, the men of the city came and asked about them. They told Lot that they wanted to meet the men so they could “know them” (Gen. 19:5). Now, if the homosexuals of our day are right, then these men were far from being inhospitable. It would even seem, as if they went out of their way in order to meet these two visitors of their city. However, the context and a knowledge of the Bible phrase “know them” reveals their most glaring sin. Lot went outside to talk with the men and he described what they wanted to do with the visitors as wickedness (Gen. 19:7). He even offered his two virgin daughters to them to do as they wished, but they refused this offer (Gen. 19:8). It would be extremely inhospitable to rape a visitor in your area, but upon reading the context and other Bible references to this incident, the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah is homosexuality, which is an abomination in the sight of God (Lev. 18:22; 20:13).

The phrase “know them” points to an act of wickedness wherein these men wanted to have sexual relations with these two visitors, and the level of their depravity can be seen in verse eleven when they wore themselves out trying to find the door of Lot’s house even after they were struck with blindness! Another instance of this phrase being used to describe sexual immorality is found in the book of Judges. A Levite was the guest of a man in Gibeah, a town belonging to the Benjamites (Judg. 19:16). The men of that city were wicked and desired the visitor of Gibeah for the same reason the people of Sodom wanted the angels. The text reads, “As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain base fellows, beset the house round about, beating at the door; and they spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thy house, that we may know him” (Judg. 19:22). The concubine of the Levite was given to these wicked men and they took her, raped her, and left her for dead (Judg. 19:25-26). These men “knew her” in the same way that the wicked men of Sodom wanted to “know” the angels who were visiting at Lot’s house: a sexually immoral, perverse way.

Another conclusive argument showing the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah to be homosexuality is found in Jude 7. Jude writes describing the punishment of the wicked saying “Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, having in like manner with these given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire” (Jude 7). Why are the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah suffering the punishment of eternal fire? They committed fornication by “going after strange flesh.”

This is some of what the Bible says about the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah and it does not describe a people given over to the sin of inhospitality. The Lord’s reference to these cities in Matthew 10:14-15 and Luke 10:10-12 has nothing to do with inhospitality. These passages refer to the punishment meted out to those who refuse the gospel invitation, and as said by our Lord it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for those who reject him and his disciples (Luke 10:12). A severe warning to all of the importance receiving those who teach the gospel of Christ.

The Bible also condemns homosexuality in a number of other passages. The Law of Moses reads “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” (Lev. 18:22). “And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them” (Lev. 20:13). As a, king of Israel, purged a people out of the land of Israel called Sodomites. “And he put away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made” (1 Kings 15:12). These people were called Sodomites because of the sin they commit- ted, not because they were from Sodom, which had been destroyed many years earlier.

The price of a dog was not to be brought into the house of God (Deut. 23:17-18). The Hebrew term translated “dog” refers to a male practicing sodomy and prostitution in religious rituals. God’s use of the term “dog” is interesting and informative when one considers the actual lifestyle of the common homosexual. The number of sexual contacts, the anonymous nature of many of the contacts, and the degrading acts committed by homosexuals of which it is not fitting to speak, all give rise to the term “dog” (Eph. 5:12).

Jesus, contrary to Ms. Price’s belief, did address the sin of homosexuality in Matthew 19:4-9. Jesus teaches concerning marriage that it is a union of a male and a female, and that is as God established it in the very beginning. God created Eve, a female, for Adam, and declared that they should leave father and mother, cleave to one another, and become one flesh (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:5-6). God did not create a man for a man, nor a woman for a woman, but a woman for a man and the two are to become one flesh and remain in that condition for life. Fornication is given by Jesus as the only reason for breaking that union. The innocent party may divorce the one guilty of fornication and remarry according to our Lord’s teaching in Matthew 19:9 and Matthew 5:32. Fornication is a broad term which includes the sin of homosexuality. The passage noted earlier in Jude 7 indicates that those in Sodom were guilty of fornication or sexual immorality and described that further as “going after strange flesh.” The “going after strange flesh” is a phrase referring to homosexuality and/or bestiality. A man who has a sexual relationship with his wife is not guilty of “going after strange flesh” because God created the man and woman for each other. But, a man going after a man or a woman going after a woman is strange because it goes against the design and revelation of God. Jesus taught the truth, a man and a woman united for life; and fornication, whose definition includes homosexuality, is a sin which violates that relationship.

The apostles were Christ’s spokesmen on earth (Matt. 16:19). They were commissioned by him to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (Mark 16:15). The message delivered by the apostles was the same message they received from Jesus (Gal. 1:11-12). Paul said concerning the things that he wrote, “If any man thinketh himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto you, that they are the commandment of the Lord” (1 Cor. 14:37).

Paul denounced homosexuality as a sin deserving of death (Rom. 1:26-32). He told the Corinthians that homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10). But, he went on to say that some of them were (past tense) homosexuals, “but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:11).

They had been homosexuals, but they repented of this sin. This is contrary to what many homosexuals would have us believe. We are told by the elite of society that homosexuals are born that way and they cannot change their sexual orientation.

Peter and Jude both referred to Sodom and Gomorrah when discussing the punishment that awaits the wicked (2 Pet. 2:6; Jude 7). Homosexuality is mentioned a number of times in the Bible. The false ideas taught by Peter Gomes, Deb Price, and others of their persuasion will not stand up when exposed to the light of the gospel (Eph. 5:11-13).

Peter said that some would twist the Scriptures to lead disciples away (2 Pet. 3:16-17). Do not be misled by the constant bombardment of The Courier-Journal or any other source that contradicts plain teaching from the word of God.

I have never made any claims with respect to being a scholar, and so far as I know, no one has ever accused me of being a scholar, at least not to the extent that I have formal training or credentials which are prescribed by the literary community. But I think that I have enough intelligence, knowledge, and experience to recognize scholarship when I see/hear it (or don’t see/hear it, as the case may be).

I have respect for those who have made special efforts to obtain knowledge in a given field, and have also obtained a commensurate degree of wisdom to go with their knowledge (Prov. 1:1-9; 4:7). I am still trying to learn both the writing and speaking of the English language, and a few experts in this area have flattered me into believing that I have at least obtained a passing grade in my efforts.

With the Greek language, it is an entirely different mat- ter. I can neither speak, read, nor write Greek, unless it be a transliterated term like “baptism,” or the Greek word for God’s called-out people, the church. But, I do know some Greek scholars (though not personally), who translated the New Testament from Greek into English, and I’m a pretty good reader of the English language, as well as a fair speaker and writer. And I’m not too overly impressed by philosophers or scholars who resort to human reasoning and what they term “a new hermeneutics,” while “intruding into those things which he (they) hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his (their) fleshly mind(s)” (Col. 2:8, 18).

I used to think I knew where Romans 14 fit into the Book of Romans, and into the other New Testament epistles (to wit, right between chapters 13 and 15). But if some things I’m reading and hearing are true, Romans 14 has at least an hundred more verses than it used to contain, and several of the other New Testament epistles have been deleted to get their contents into Romans 14, and said epistles are rendered completely meaningless.

For instance, let us use Matthew 14 and 16 as an example, then return to Romans 14. In Matthew 14, we have chronicled the events which led to the beheading of John the Baptist. The body (whether with or without the head, I know not), was dutifully buried by his disciples, then they “went and told Jesus” (Matt. 14:12). Without claiming to be a scholar, I know that some events recorded in the Bible, in both Old and New Testaments, are not always recorded chronologically. But in the case of John the Baptist’s death, Jesus visited several other places around the Sea of Gennesaret (Galilee), eventually “came into the coasts of Caesarea” (Matt. 16:13ff), and among other things said, “I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18). John the Baptist had been dead for two chapters and several months before Jesus even promised to build his (Christ’s) church at some future date. So, John never built any church for himself, much less one for Christ, the “bridegroom” (John 3:29, 30). Now, back to the Book of Romans . . .

If Romans 14 admits as many false doctrines and teachers as some scholars and their non-scholar disciples claim, then the language of Romans 16:17 is utterly superfluous as well as contradictory. In the latter passage, Paul admonishes, even commands and beseeches, “. . . mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” Such doctrines and their advocates are further identified in the following verse, who “by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple” (v. 18). If I understand English, the “doctrine” of Romans 16:17 is the same thing as the “doc- trine (gospel) of Christ” in 1 Timothy 1:9, 10.

Scholars tell us that 13 or 14 of the New Testament epistles were written by Paul (and though not a scholar, I can count that far). This being the case, much of what Paul wrote in later epistles (as they appear in the New Testament order), including Romans 16:17, contradicts or nullifies what he wrote in Romans 14. In practical application, as far as false teaching/teachers are concerned, the New Testament ends with Romans 14 the way some interpret it.

Further, it may be claimed that if we are going to have the peace enjoined in Romans 14:19, that we will have to fellowship or bid God speed to those who teach contrary to the doctrine of Christ with respect to marriage/divorce/ remarriage, human institutions usurping the work/mission of the church, and even with respect to the plan of salvation itself (“What must I do to be saved?”). But James answers this supposed dilemma when he says, “But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable . . .” (Jas. 3:17). Without maintaining the purity of the doctrine of Christ, we can attain only to a worldly definition of peace, and not a peace that is of God (John 14:27).

Let us leave the language of Romans 14 where it is in that epistle, and with respect to other New Testament epistles.

By Donald Townsley

Many good members of the church who would not think of using the vile gutter language of the man of the world, will turn right around and use the euphemistic form of the same words and think nothing of it. Christians need to realize that they will give account for their words, thoughts, and actions. The Lord said in Matthew 12:36: “But I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.”

Following is a list of some of the words many members of the church use without thinking anything of it, but which are euphemisms (softened forms of a word or phrase that is considered less offensive) of the “real thing.”

1. “Blamed” — “damned” — a euphemism (Funk & Wagnall’s Dictionary).

2. “Darn” — a euphemism for “damn” (the curse). (Funk & Wagnall’s Dict. of the American Language).

3. “Dickens” — “the devil” (Funk & Wagnall’s Dictio ary).

4. “What the Deuce” — “deuce” means “devil” (Funk & Wagnall’s Dictionary).

5. “Dog-gone” or “doggoned” — A euphemism for “God-damn” (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language).

6. “Gee” — a minced oath: “Jesus” (Funk & Wagnall’s Dictionary); a euphemistic contraction of “Jesus” (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language).

7. “Golly” — a euphemism for “God” (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language).

8. “Gosh” — a minced oath, used as a substitute for “God” (Funk & Wagnall’s Dictionary); a euphemism for “God” (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language).

9. “Heck” used euphemistically for “hell” (Funk & Wagnall’s Dictionary); a euphemism for “hell” (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language).

10. “Goodness” or “For Goodness Sake” — a euphemism for “God” (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language).

11. “Blasted” — “damned” (Webster’s New World Dic tionary of the American Language).

12. “Confounded” — “damned”; a mild oath (Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language).

Brother and sister, don’t use words that you don’t know the meaning of. If you do, you may find yourself cursing without realizing it!