Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

Acceptable obedience in the sight of the Lord is not the mere mechanical performance of certain duties. God is interested in the heart that prompts the service; whereas man assumes that doing “what God says” is all that is important. The failure to see obedience as the Lord conceives it leads to vain and void sacrifice. Obedience is more than doing; it involves and includes more than physical activity.

In Israel

When God brought His people from beneath the power of Pharoah and the sting of the taskmasters whip, He did not immediately command specific, external duty. “Just do this and this, and it will repay me for having delivered you from Egypt.” This was not Gods way, and through Jeremiah He warned and reminded His people that it was not. “Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh. For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you” (Jer. 7:21-23).

Isaiah wrote of a “sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters” (Isa. 1: 4-6). Like Sodom, they hid not their sin, rather they were proud of it; they declared it (Isa. 3:9)! Yet in all the muck and mire of wickedness, they ceased not to offer a “multitude” of sacrifices, therefore, God reproved them thusly:

“Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth; they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood” (Isa. 1:10-15).

Saul learned this lesson from Samuel and Amalek. He did not “utterly destroy” Amalek as God directed, but spared some “to sacrifice unto~the Lord” (I Sam. 15). From the lips of Samuel, there echoed the fundamental principle of acceptable service unto God. “Hath the Lord as greatdelight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams” (I Sam. 15:22). In like fashion, the Psalmist said, “For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, 0 God, thou wilt not despise” (Psa. 51:16, 17).

In Jesus Day

The Pharisees of Jesus day were meticulous moralists who scrupulously paid tithes and observed minute, detailed traditions. As far as the eye could detect, they were righteous unto men. But our Lord knew their hearts and openly revealed and rebuked their hypocrisy and iniquity. The difference between their profession and their actual condition is the difference between mans views of acceptable obedience as opposed to Gods. The divergent concept is enunciated by our Lord in Luke 16:15, “Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: For that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.”

Summary

God did not need the bulls and goats of sacrifice. The point and purpose of animal offerings was not to supply Gods lack, “For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine. If I were hungry, I would not tell thee: for the world is mine and the fullness thereof” (Psa. 50:10-12). Likewise, God does not need our contribution, our dimes and dollars. Fort Knox and the world are His! We are the needy ones. We need to learn obedience, to offer our hearts on the altar of crucified flesh. When we are awakened, quickened, and challenged in this respect, our spirits will be justified, our activities sanctified, and our God glorified.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 30, pp. 7-8
June 1, 1972

By Billy W. Moore

Almost from the beginning of family life there have been family troubles. Trouble is defined as: “To agitate; disturb. To agitate mentally or spiritually; worry. To afflict physically; ail. To put to inconvenience.” (Webster)

The Occasion for the First Family Trouble. Unto Adam and Eve were born two sons, Cain and Abel. Cain grew up to become a tiller of the ground, while Abel became a keeper of the sheep. Each of them “brought … an offering to the Lord.” (Gen. 4:3,4) They would not have known to bring an offering if they had not been taught to do so. Perhaps Adam and Eve had made many offerings, thus the boys would have observed such as they grew up. Your children will never know how to give unto God an offering of praise, of talent, or of money if they are not taught. In our materialistic society the first thing most people think about when they make more money is getting more “stuff and things” for self. (Cf. Luke 12:16-19)

Cain and Abel brought an offering because God commanded it. While the command is not recorded in the Genesis account, we know such was made. “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain.” (Heb. 11:4) Since “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10: 17), it is necessarily inferred that God told Abel what to offer. Knowing that God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34), we also necessarily infer that God told Cain what to offer.

God had no respect to Cain and to his offering because he did not offer what God commanded.

Being a tiller of the ground, Cain brought an offering of the ground. Thus, he substituted what he thought would be alright for that which God commanded. Cain did not do well (Genesis 4:7). There are still some who contend that it does not matter what you do in religion, just so you are honest and sincere. There is nothing in the text which infers that Cain was not honest and sincere in his offering. He just did not offer what God commanded. He did make an offering, which is more than some people do. In fact some church members do not make much of an offering. They do not give bountifully, but sparingly. After all we have to look out for ourselves, they say (Read 2 Cor. 9:6-7). Remember, “God is not mocked.” (Gal. 6:7). Cain did worship God, which is better than some do. Some members of the church choose to tend to their business, gather their harvest, or pursue pleasure rather than worship God. Cain was not all bad, but out stripped many of today’s citizens.

Jude wrote of some who “have gone in the way of Cain.” (Jude 11) The way of Cain is the way of the transgressor. (Cf. 2 John 9-11) It is the way of vain worship. (Cf. Matt. 15:9) It is the way of rebelling against God. He evidently did not like what God commanded, or found it inconvenient to obey, so he rebelled against God and His way, and substituted his own way. Thus, the way of Cain is the way of substitution. God says, “Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain.” The way of Cain is the way of woe.

The Trouble Itself. Cain’s reaction upon learning that God did not respect his offering, i.e. that his worship was not acceptable: “Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.” (Gen. 4:5) His anger was against his brother, though Abel had done nothing wrong. How often when people learn that their service to God is not in keeping with God’s way, they will become angry with those who are following the right way, rather than correcting their own lives. Thus, they make the matter worse.

Cain’s countenance fell. The word countenance comes from a Latin word “continere,” meaning to hold together, repress, contain. The idea being that the expression of his face showed disapproval and anger. God said, “If thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.” Cain did not control his anger, but let it get the upper hand. “And it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.” (Gen. 4:8)

Why would he kill his brother? “Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.” G John 3:12) This is envy! Envy “is the feeling of displeasure produced by witnessing or hearing of the advantage or prosperity of others.” (W. E. Vine) God has charged Christians, “Be ye angry and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath.” (Eph. 4:26)

Cain’s works were evil because they were not what God commanded; Abel’s were righteous because they were what God commanded. Yes, it does make a difference what we do in serving God. What about the works of some men today who are acclaiming service to God? Consider: burning incense, making of images, instrumental music in worship, church sponsored recreation, etc. These are done by honest sincere people who are claiming to be serving God.

The First Family Trouble Developed Over Religion. Cain should have repented when he learned that his offering was not acceptable. How difficult it is to work repentance. Some just will not admit, “I am wrong, I have sinned.” Cain should have rejoiced that his brother was acceptable unto God. But some men can never rejoice in the goodness of others.

Many other families have had trouble over religion. I suspect it shall always be so in this world. The Lord once said, “A man’s foes shall be they of his own household.” (Matt. 10:36) Some in a family will believe and obey the truth, while others will not. Sometimes those who do not obey the truth will come to hate those who do.

The Consequences of the First Family Trouble. First, an innocent man died. This is frequently the case, the innocent are made to suffer in family trouble. Children suffer when their father and mother have trouble. A mother is hurt when her child is in trouble. Second, Cain was “cursed from the earth” (Gen. 4: 1112). The earth would not yield her strength for him. Third, Cain was to become a fugitive and a vagabond. He begged for mercy. The Lord placed a mark upon him, and decreed that whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken sevenfold. (Gen. 4:13-15) Fourth, Adam and Eve suffered greatly as a result of this family trouble.

How To Avoid Family Trouble. While I make no claim to being an expert in family troubles, and certainly do not seek to involve myself in the trouble of other families, yet through years of Bible study, twenty years of gospel preaching, and observing trouble in many families, I can offer some suggestions as to how to avoid family trouble. These suggestions are merely Bible principles. For what they are worth:

1. Do not hold anger and jealousy in your heart. “An angry man stireth up strife.” (Prov. 29:22) “He that is soon angry dealeth foolishly.” (Prov. 14:17)

2. Husbands love your wives as your own bodies. (Eph. 5:28-29) There will be no lack of trust, no jealousy, where this is obeyed. This will prevent criticism of your wife before others, which often leads to family trouble.

3. Wives see that ye reverence your husbands (Eph. 5:31) and submit unto your own husbands. (Eph. 5:23) A contentious woman is sure to cause family trouble. (Prov. 21:9, 19)

4. Fathers, provoke not your children to wrath. (Eph. 6:4) “The forcing of wrath bringeth forth strife.” (Prov. 30:33)

5. Children obey your parents. (Eph. 6:1) Disobedient children are a cause of much family trouble. The rod and reproof give wisdom; but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame. (Prov. 29:15) A foolish son is a grief to his father and bitterness to her that bare him. (Prov. 17:25)

6. Practice the golden rule. Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you. “A soft answer turneth away wrath, but grievous words stir up anger.” (Prov. 15: 1) Wouldn’t you rather have others speak to you with a soft answer instead of grievous words? Sharp words spoken in haste cause much family trouble. Be kind, courteous, and thankful, as you would have others be unto you.

7. Do, not try to run the lives of others. Trying to manage your children’s home could cause serious family trouble. Trying to tell someone how to raise their children also causes trouble. (Usually those who know the most about how to raise children have had no first hand experience.)

8. Try to implant in the mind of each member of the family the importance of doing the will of God. If everyone in your family believes in God and wants to please him, there is less chance of serious family trouble ever developing.

If family trouble does arise, do not blame the Lord for it. The Lord has a balm for every wound, a blessing for all who seek it. If you have been the cause of family trouble, repent of your sins and make things right with your family and right with God. There is enough sin and sorrow in this life without having to live with it in your own family. God help us to be close as families, and to live close to Him.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 29, pp. 8-10
May 25, 1972

By Grant B. Caldwell

It would seem obvious that one of the most important questions ever investigated by man is that of the existence of God. Is there in reality a Supreme Being who knows all, understands all, possesses all power, and abides in all places? All of this and much more is included in the question we ask. Our purpose in this writing is not to analyze all of the characteristics of God, but to see if we cannot come to some reasonable conclusion concerning His existence. Does God exist??? The question is of prime importance because “Without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he that cometh to God must believe that He is. . . .” (Heb 11:6)

We cannot know God apart from that which He has revealed to us. Those to whom the scriptures have not gone have “no hope” and are “without God” (Eph. 2:12), because by human wisdom, we cannot know God (I Cor. 1: 2 1). But rather than argue the point, the Bible simply accepts the fact of the existence of God. The first verse says, “In the Beginning God…” and from that point treats of His relationship to man. Whether or not this claim it; true cannot be proved in the proverbial “test tube,” but may be, discussed in terms of the evidence presented on either side of the question. Thus, the question actually is, “Is it more reasonable to believe in the existence of God, or is it more reasonable to believe that He does not exist?”

Schools of Thought

There are three basic positions or schools of thought taken in reference to this question. 1. Theism: This is the belief that God does in fact exist; that there is in truth intelligence higher than ours known as Deity. 2. Atheism: This belief denies the former and would establish all as material. 3. Agnosticism: The agnostic argues that it cannot be known and cannot be shown to be true, one way or the other.

For our purposes, we are going to eliminate this third position. The agnostic will give up all belief simply upon the basis that he does not have “test tube” proof. It is a non-committal position that leaves the advocate free to agree or disagree with anyone at anytime. It should be noted, however, that the agnostic does not simply say, “I dont know.” He believes that it cannot be shown one way or the other. He, thus, gives up all because he cannot be shown.

Types of Proof

There are two types of proof commonly accepted in scientific fields that we would like to use in this discussion. One is what is generally called Deductive Reasoning. It is widely used in the proving of mathematical theorems. It reasons from the more general to the specific. Mathematicians use axioms to prove conclusions. Similarly, we might consider:

Something cannot come from nothing — axiomatic.

Something is — axiomatic.

Therefore, something always was — conclusion.

Now, what was that something?

The other type of proof argues from the specific to the more general. This type of reasoning is called Inductive Reasoning. By using the lesser things we know, we can establish a greater principle. This is the type of proof used by Paul in Rom. 1: 19-20.

Look now at the evidence as to the existence of God and determine in your own mind which is more reasonable to believe. We make but three arguments in favor of the existence of God. These can be broken down into more detailed proofs which we will notice to some extent as we continue.

The Existence of Matter

The very fact that there is a material world testifies to the existence of God. The universe, the world, chemicals, vegetables, flesh, blood, bones all exist. The question is “How did these material elements come into existence?” There must be some source, but what is it? The Atheist says that it is matter –matter is eternal. The idea being that all existing matter has come from pre-existing matter. The most frequently preached facet of this doctrine is Evolution.

Consider, though, that matter does not have knowledge or understanding. Matter by its very definition is “inanimate” and “lifeless.” While there may be life associated with matter, the matter itself is not the life (compare a body without life.) Matter does not have intelligence. It does not control, direct, or modify. There are too many substances in existence for them to come from another substance that has no ability. And too, it has been shown that matter is not eternal.

The Theist, on the other hand, believes that God (supreme mind and intelligence) brought matter into existence. Mind has knowledge and understands. It is intelligence, it does control, direct, and modify. Mind is likewise eternal. Not just any mind, but Supreme Mind. Which is more reasonable to believe in as the cause of existing matter?

As we notice the material creation, we that it does have and shows great design and purpose. Observe the size of the universe, and yet, notice its design. From the universe itself to the smallest atom, everything has its laws, its design, its mathematical principles and precisions. And even though billions upon billions of miles are involved, scientists can tell you to the minute such things as when the sun will eclipse, though years from now. John H. Gerstner illustrated it in this way in his book Reasons for Faith:

“Take but one illustration of the teamwork of the universe, a raindrop. The raindrop falls on the earth and provides the soil with various necessary elements. It is taken up into the trees and flowers and herbs by their various root systems. There the water, by a process called photosynthesis, is transformed into things useful to plant life and released to the air in a gaseous form, ultimately to visit the earth again as a raindrop” (page 33-34).

David said, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handywork.” (Psalms 19. 1) Paul said, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead.” (Rom. 1: 20) Again, the Hebrew writer said, “Through Faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” (Heb. 11:3) The theist believes in God because the existence of matter displays marks of intelligent causation. If matter is so finely engineered, is there no Engineer? If scientific laws are so precise, is there no Lawgiver? If we see such amazing design, can we suppose there is no Designer? There is mathematical exactness and yet no Mathematician? Which is more reasonable to believe???

The Existence of Life

As noted earlier, the Theory of evolution is the Atheists most frequently preached doctrine. This theory (and it should be thoroughly understood that it is just a theory) says that inanimate matter, being acted upon by natural forces, gave origin to minute “living organisms.” (See tract God or Evolution, Luther Blackmon, page 5-available from Truth Magazine Bookstore) One of the most complex, and certainly the most avoided, subject known to the evolutionist is the origin of life. It is a subject to which he cannot give a scientific answer. He may preach evolution all day long, but as to how this process began, he will be as silent as Washingtons tomb. It is a “no-no” to mention origins to an evolutionist.

“Spontaneous generation,” as it is frequently called, will not and cannot explain the cause of fife. Which was the first life and what was the natural force (or forces) acting upon it?

However you might wish to look at it, there must be a Prime Cause. There must be a cause that had no cause. If man came from a lower form, from where did the lower form come? If from still a lower form, how far back can you go? Eventually something will have to be without came.

The Atheist says that he knows there must be a first or prime cause, but denies it to be God. He then admits that it was lifeless matter which violates every scientific principle known to man. i One fundamental scientific law is that everything produces after its own kind. Science has never known actual life to come from non-life matter. In Man does Not-Stand Alone, by Morrison, we read, “So many essential conditions are necessary for life to exist on our earth that it is mathematically impossible that all of them could exist in proper relationship on any one earth at one time by chance. Therefore, there must be in nature some form of intelligent direction” (p. 13).

Which is more reasonable to believe? Is it more reasonable to believe that life began in a natural way by violating every principle of nature, or to believe that God created life? Volumes could be and have been written on the subject of evolution. Our purpose is not to resolve this question, but rather that of the existence of God.

There is man whose body has fascinated the greatest of minds. Compare his heart with the giant pumps of industry. Compare his eye with the telescopes in our observatories. Compare his hand with the tools of construction. All of the machinery mentioned has definite originators. Is it reasonable to suppose there is no originator for man?

And then, there is the insect kingdom and the plant Idngd6m and the animal kingdom and the undersea kingdom … and every one is just as amazing as the one before it . . . But is it reasonable to suppose there is no King?

The Existence of Mind

The fact that man possesses a unique nature is an undeniable truth. Man is different. He possesses mind or intelligence, the ability to reason. This is not simply animal intelligence, the ability to associate, but is reasoning and calculation. Where did man obtain this difference? The Atheist says that it just happened to evolve in the process of time. Again, we say that this is an unproved and improvable theory. Evolution has no continuity and is constantly talking about the missing link, when we wonder if there is a chain at all. It makes no account for mans unique nature, his rational thought.

Man has a moral sense. He has always felt a deep sense of that which is right and wrong. Animals do not feel such morality. We have laws based on the rights of man and when these laws are violated, the violator is properly prosecuted by the courts of our land. Why, if his nature is no different from that of the animal?

Man has rational thought. Thousands of colleges and universities educate our young men and women. Public schools teach our children. Why? Is it not because of our ability over the animal creation to learn? Account for mans superiority.

Man is esthetic in nature. Which animal would appreciate a Rembrandt or the beauty of nature? Mans religious nature, his conscience, etc., all show the unique nature of man. How does man come to have this nature?

The Theist answers all of these questions in simple basic terms  “God did if!” Which is more reasonable to believe? The Atheist whose “proofs” have all fallen, or the Theist who has never been given a morsel of proof to show the absence of God???

Conclusion

The Bible teaches that we can see that God is in existence from that which He has done. We are not left to grope about wondering. I believe in God because I cannot explain what I know to be true without Him. Can you? If you think you can, there is a standing challenge by men of accepted academic qualifications to openly discuss this matter with any scientist who will affirm otherwise.

Which is more reasonable to believe? “In the beginning the heavens and earth just happened,” or “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” (Gen. 1: 1)

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 29, pp. 5-7
May 25, 1972

By Cecil Willis

In a previous article, we talked about some of the scriptural proscriptions against astrology, witchcraft, or black magic. This strange mixture of pagan religion, superstition, quackery, and big business is sweeping our land, as I wish to show in this article. See last weeks articles for the scriptures which condemn “star-gazing.”

Prevalence

Nearly everyone in this country has heard of the predictions of Jeane Dixon, or read Carroll Lighters horoscope column, or heard of Bishop John A. Pikes alleged communion through ,several mediums (including one Christian, church preacher, Arthur Ford of Philadelphia) with his son who had shortly beforehand committed suicide.

But these false prophets are only the tip of the iceberg. That is much more! Twelve hundred daily newspapers in the United States now publish horoscope columns. Twenty years ago one hundred papers carried such a column.

Sybil Leek, “a self-proclaimed, practicing witch,” counts 400 “authentic witches” among her personal friends in the United States, and estimates that the world witch population is eight million. There are estimated to be ten thousand Americans who make their livings fortune-telling.” And some members of the church are not reluctant to patronize these witches! Many business firms now employ full-time astrologers. New Yorks Abraham and Strauss department store is reported to have retained Lloyd Cope in 1969 as its official astrology consultant. One member of the New York stock exchange “likes to conclude important deals at three A. M. because of his astrologers counsel,” as reported by Life Magazine. Joseph Bayly states: “Witchcraft is probably been helped with the historic problem of its image by the recent movie Rosemarys Baby, and by the television series, Bewitched; the latter features a beautiful witch, Samantha” (What About Horoscopes? p. 27).

If you doubt that astrology and witchcraft are widespread in this country, go to a local bookstore or magazine display rack and note the book and article titles. One such bookstore had the following titles: Astrology for Everyday Living; Astrology Made Practical; Fortunetelling With Cards; Dreams and Your Horoscope; Your Character in the Stars; Numerology; Your Future in Your Hand; Astrology Answers Your Questions; Astrology, Mythology, and the Bible; Astrology and Your Destiny; The Tarot Revealed; and Your Sun Personality.

Then there are all kinds of specialized astrology books. One hundred thousand gamblers bought Astrology and Horse Racing in a recent year. The spring 1972 Saturday Evening Post on p. 36 has a regular feature entitled “Dog Horoscopes,” by Liz Tresilian, sub-titled “A Dissertation on matters of canine zodiacal import,” in case you are worried about your dogs future.

Or you can buy Your Babys First Horoscope; Astrology for Teens; or How to Find Your Mate Through Astrology. Then there is an Astrological Guide to Good Health; or a Five Year Diet and Health Horoscope; or Cooking with Astrology, and a Zodiac Cookbook. Then there are other books entitled Astrology and, the United States, and The Bird-feather Astrological Space Book. Then there is Astrology for Hounds, or Cat Horoscope Book. Like other false religions, just nearly any kind you want!

According to the New York Times, each book in a series on the signs of the Zodiac has sold 2.5 to 3 million copies every year. In less than two years, Doubledays occult Universe Book Club attracted over one hundred thousand members from all ages, sexes, and localities. Bayly reported: “A Bantam sales executive says that the market for his companys occult line is primarily in the Bible-Belt and the Deep South.” (P. 10). Frankly, I do not know what the implication of that statement is.

But with this modern outbreak of what is alleged to be witchcraft, what should be the attitude of Christians toward it? In 1691-92, at Salem Village, Massachusetts, there was an outbreak of what was adjudged to be witchcraft. Initially two people were fascinating some teenage girls during winter afternoons with palmistry, fortune telling, necromancy, magic, and spiritism. The Salem community became so wrought up over this resurgence of black magic that they conducted the now infamous Salem “witch trials.” Before the matter was ended in Salem Village, nineteen alleged witches were hanged!

Now I am not advocating the hanging of anyone, but I do think the attitude of Christians toward these self-confessed witches should be different than what it oftentimes is. Salems extreme reaction to witchery drove the black magic business underground for three centuries. It now has been exhumed and given respectability by some who do not even profess really to believe in it. Some forms of witchcraft have become afternoon and evening fun-games, even to some Christians. Bayly speaks of “Our light and frivolous approach to the unseen spirit world today, our craze for horoscopes and mediums, fortune-tellers and Ouija boards-turning it all into one big game . . .” (p. 45).

These who claim to be witches and fortune-tellers affirm that they have contact with the unseen and evil spirit world. If you do not believe they do have such contact, you should certainly leave them alone and not patronize them. And one is paying their fee, whether he pays it directly to the fortune-teller or medium, or whether he buys a newspaper or magazine in order to read his horoscope. And if one really believes he has contact with some mysterious spirit world through a Ouija board or a fortune teller, he has accepted already the deadly sin of sorcery. Whether he believes it is for real, or just uses it for an afternoon or evenings fun, the Christian should have no part in satanic stargazing or sorcery. (One More Article to Follow)

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVI: 29, pp. 3-4
May 25, 1972