Truth Magazine

By Leslie Diestelkamp

Every real Christian must indeed be tired of the constant conflict to which we are continually committed. War is always a grueling experience, but this is especially so in case of civil war-war between people of the same citizenship. And the same is true spiritually. Doctrinal conflict with denominational forces may become frustrating but when that same kind of struggle is with our own brethren in the Lord it is significantly more demoralizing.

Perhaps 99% of God’s faithful people have a burning desire for peace and unity and an overwhelming yearning for an end of internal conflict among brethren. Oh how we wish we could awake some morning soon and find that divisive issues have disappeared and that total love and harmony prevails! “How good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity” (Ps. 133:1). How wonderful it would be if we would all be “endeavoring to keep the, unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3).

But real peace has never been the lot of faithful Christians. We were made to be soldiers (Eph. 6:10;17), not just nurse-maids. We are ordered to contend (Jude 3), not to compromise. We are built up as living stones (I Pet. 2:5), not as soft modeling clay. Our greatest mission is not peace, but purity (Jas. 3:17). And so, without malice for people, indeed with sincere love and good will for -all, especially for brethren, we must relentlessly wage a good warfare (I Tim. 1:18; 6:12), not only upholding truth, but also opposing error.

Some brethren who actually believe truth, and who desire no departure, have apparently become so battle-weary that they have become obsessed with peace, even peace at any price. This is a destructive and deadly attitude and will, if pursued by many, bring great havoc to the Lord’s church. But some of these are now so determined to have fellowship with all brethren that they even refuse to recognize the line that others have drawn-they are trying to ignore a division others produced and force a unity others neither desire nor allow.

Most of the advocates of church support of human institutions and of sponsoring churches today obviously do not want fellowship with opponents of such programs. They have drawn a line of demarcation so sharply that it cannot be crossed by me, regardless of how much I might desire, without a complete surrender of my conscience that would render me a spineless, milque toast, unworthy of respect by God or man!

We must not allow battle-fatigue to hinder our over-riding objective-to seek peace with purity. So we must fight on, for this warfare is not really ours but, “the battle is the Lord’s” (1Sam. 17:47).

Truth Magazine, XVIII:37, p. 2
July 25, 1974

By Larry Ray Hafley

Truth Magazine needs some articles on “first principles.” This became acutely apparent when the editor went through over a thousand pages of manuscripts just to come up with enough articles for one issue devoted to non-Christians. Editor Willis said he has dozens of articles from some writers; however, not a one of them has anything that would instruct a sinner what to do to be saved. In all the articles in the files for publication, not one could be found that would inform the Gentiles about the nature of the church. This indicates a need, a great need.

A Family Paper

Yes, Truth Magazine is a family paper. It is a family paper for families that are Christians. It does not pretend to be a paper for “outsiders.” We do not intend to give the paper any kind of special “family” appeal or thrust. It already has that. It appeals to families that are Christians because it deals with problems and issues that interest most Christians. We have no intention of making a “first principles” journal out of Truth Magazine. This is not a veiled slur at those that are so designed. There are several good papers whose avowed purpose is to reach and teach the lost what to do to be saved. That is good. That is as it should be. We do not criticize such efforts. We commend them. By the same token, we do not condemn the papers designed to inform the sinner because they do not carry articles about issues of contention among brethren. That is not their purpose, so they should not do so as a general rule. Likewise, it is not our policy to publish a paper for the man of the world. For this reason, we do not have many articles which show the plan of salvation. Now, though, we need a few such articles occasionally. These do not indicate a desire to alter the course of the paper, but rather to give it the balance that it must have. Special issues may be devoted to basic teachings in the future. To accomplish this, we need good, well-written articles on the fundamentals of becoming a Christian, the nature of the church, and related topics.

Let none of our trembling sisters among the brethren get their hopes up. We are not about to let our heel lighten up on the neck of error and errorists. Innovationists and institutionalists should not breathe a sigh of relief on our account. We shall continue to prosecute and persecute sin and sinners both in and out of the faith, the Lord willing. We simply desire to have a few more articles on hand which will be useful in informing the, lost on their duty and destiny. If this is “mellowing” or going “soft,” then we shall just have to face the fact that teaching the lost is only for the sweet, mellow softies.

Send the requested articles to Cecil Willis, 4867 N. 300 E., Marion, Indiana 46952. And, thanks.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:37, p. 2
July 25, 1974

By Raymond E. Harris

The UPI News Service recently released a story from Rome which contained some rather unbelievable statements from members of a 10 man panel of Vatican experts on exorcism. They had just seen a private screening of the highly controversial film “The Exorcist.” They unanimously gave the picture their “unofficial blessing.”

Despite the fact that the film is filled with language not fit for a mule to hear (including most every word ever written on a bus station restroom wall) they said, “All of us thought it was a good film.” Despite the fact that the film shows a young girl urinating in front of a party crowd and practicing masturbation with a crucifix, the priests thought that in contrast to many ultra-violent pictures “The Exorcist is tame and upbeat.” Despite all the scenes that deal with pus, vomit, blood and spit, these Catholic theologians exclaimed, “This is the real thing,” Despite levitating beds, mysteriously moving chests and chairs and a variety of other Hollywood goodies, these Catholic officials described the movie by saying “The viewers are seeing a realistic and accurate representation of a mystery the Roman Catholic Church believes in . . . .”

It seems to me that the Catholic Church must be starving for sensational publicity to sanction such as this. Even the callous movie industry gave the film an “R” Rating and banned everyone under 18 from seeing the filthy thing; but, some of the Vaticans finest think it’s a “good film.”

Yes, there were priests and other Catholics coming and going all through the film, but in reality the Catholic Church was not depicted all that gloriously. The priest that might be described as one of the main characters, drank, smoked, and was filled with guilt, depression, said he was losing his faith and gave serious consideration to getting out of the priesthood. And in the final analysis, the old priest that was called in to practice the exorcism failed and died of a, heart attack. Then the drinking, smoking, wavering younger priest made a proposition with the demon that if he would come out of the young girl, he could come into him. And when that happened the demon possessed priest jumped out the window committing suicide.

If that’s good publicity and public relations, I do not want any. If the exorcist had centered around a gospel preacher I would have been embarrassed and ashamed. Yet Catholic experts in Rome think it is a “good film,” and give it their “unofficial blessing.”

Well, to each his own.

By the way, in case you are wondering how I know so much about the picture – I read a lot.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:36, p. 13-14
July 18, 1974

By Mike Willis

Recent articles in some of the periodicals and conversations related to me have asserted that God will overlook the sins of ignorance committed by the Christian. By the theory propounded, the sins which are committed in ignorance by the honest but sincerely mistaken Christian will be forgiven because Christ lived the perfect life in my stead. I would like to examine this theory with you in this article.

Not A New Argument

Contrary to the belief of some who are presently enthusiastically supporting the idea, the theory that God will overlook sins of ignorance is not a new theory. Anyone who has discussed the plan of salvation with a Baptist preacher has heard him make the same argument, which goes as follows: “What will God do with the sincere, un-baptized believer who died without being baptized?” Some years ago, we heard the same argument made with reference to God’s law concerning marriage, which argument tried to exempt the non-Christian from God’s law because he was ignorant of it. Now, we are hearing the same argument made with just a little different twist. Instead of discussing the non-ember, we are discussing the citizen of the kingdom. The argument goes as follows: “God will not send to hell the pious, sincere but ignorant believer who __________ fill in the blank with any or all of the following: (1) uses instrumental music in worship (2) endorses the sponsoring church arrangement (3) supports human institutions of benevolence (4) believes in premillennialism).” I am certain that you can perceive the similarities in the arguments.

Just a word needs to be said about this type of argument to prove one’s position. It is situationism. The person begins his argument from the situation, or from the human predicament, and Argues from that to his ultimate position in order to arrive at his doctrine. The scriptural method of argument is just the opposite; the individual goes to the revelation to determine what to believe and how to act in any given situation. Too, whether acknowledged or not, the basis of acceptability before God is made to be piety and sincerity. If God can overlook the sins of a Christian who is pious and sincere, but unfortunately ignorant, why can he not also, and equally justly, overlook the sins of the pious and sincere, but ignorant, non-Christian? Therefore, if the situationists’ argument proves anything, it will prove just as much for the pious and sincere, but ignorant, unbeliever as it will for the pious and sincere, but ignorant, believer.

To The Revelation

We have heard enough human predicament arguments, which prove only that humans can get themselves in some unfortunate predicaments. Now let us go to God’s revelation to see what He has promised to do about sins of ignorance.

1. The Old Testament:

“Now if a person sins and does any of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, though he was unaware, still is he guilty, and shall bear his punishment” (Lev. 5:17).

“When I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die’; and you do not warn him or speak out to warn the wicked from his wicked way that he may live, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand …. Again, when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I place an obstacle before him, he shall die in his sins, and his righteous deeds which he has

done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand” (Ezek. 3:18, 20).

Some observations seem appropriate. Notice that ignorance of God’s law was not sufficient reason for God to overlook the sin of the individual committing the sin. David did not pray, “Who can discern his errors? Acquit me of hidden faults” (Psa. 19:12) because he was a super-pious person but because one is held accountable for sins of ignorance.

2. The New Testament:

“Therefore having, overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world. (Acts 17:30).

The observation needs to be made that God did not overlook the sins of ignorance of the Jews, the people with a revelation, as we have already noticed. The doctrine taught by Paul in this passage is that since God has given a revelation to all men, Jews and Gentiles alike, all everywhere are now accountable to God for knowing and obeying that revelation!

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, ‘ will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father, who is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles. And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness”‘ (Mt. 7:21-23).

” . . sin is lawlessness” (I Jn. 3:4).

Anomia means “prop. the condition of one without law. -either because ignorant of it, or because violating it” (Thayer, p. 48). Anomia is the Greek word translated “lawlessness” in these verses. Thus, one can be a lawless, iniquitous, wicked person and not be consciously or deliberately defying God.

“And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, shall receive many lashes, but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of flogging, will receive but few” (Lk. 12:4748a).

Although God took into account the difference between deliberate sins and sins of ignorance, notice that both received punishment. Unless we believe that some will receive punishment in heaven, we must conclude that both will be in hell!

The record of the conversion of Saul demonstrates that one who is in ignorance can still be the “chief of sinners” (1 Tim. 1: 15). Thus, the biblical teaching regarding sins of ignorance is crystal clear: Man is held responsible for the sins he commits even in ignorance!

Those who are arguing that God will overlook sins of ignorance are not too sure which sins He will overlook Obviously, they, expect God to overlook doctrinal errors-at least part of them (I cannot understand how God can consistently overlook the doctrinal errors of mechanical instruments of music in worship, the sponsoring church, benevolent institutions, and premillennialism but not overlook the doctrinal errors surrounding baptism!), but they are not too sure that God will overlook sins of ignorance against His moral laws. One preacher, when pressed to answer the question, “If a Christian died while committing the act of adultery, would he go to heaven?” replied, “Yes, if his heart was right”! At least, he was consistent.

A Premium on Ignorance

The position that God will overlook sins of ignorance places a premium on ignorance. If I am committing a sin in ignorance and God will forgive me for it because I am ignorant, why should a person go to the trouble of trying to convert me from the error of my ways? (Perhaps this is the reason that some of the preachers among us have never spoken out very strongly against their brethren’s corruptions of the worship and work of the church.) If I believed that God would overlook my sins of ignorance, I would prefer that no one speak to me about my errors. I would rather stay ignorant, enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season, and go to heaven when I die than to be taught, repent, and go to heaven when I die!

If anyone knows any passage of scripture that reveals that God will overlook sins committed in ignorance, please let him call it to our attention. A person may reach the conclusion that God will overlook sins of ignorance through the situational argument, but he will not reach that conclusion from the Scriptures. Recently, I read a statement in a bulletin which contained a splendid gem of truth which said, “When a man believes sin will go unpunished, he will believe anything.” Some among us will apparently believe anything!

Truth Magazine, XVIII:36, p. 12-13
July 18, 1974