Truth Magazine

By Steve Curtis

On the nights of April 3 and 4, 1997, a debate was con-ducted discussing the terms of salvation. Gaddy Hall affirmed the proposition, “The Scriptures teach that water baptism to the penitent believer is for (in order to) the re-mission of sins in the shed blood of Jesus Christ (Col. 1:14; Rom. 3:25).” The following night Darrell G. Wright affirmed the proposition, “The Scriptures teach sinners are saved by faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ (Col. 1:14; Rom. 3:25) alone, before and without baptism.” The de-bate was conducted in Whitesburg, Kentucky at the Letcher County Courthouse. Gaddy Hall preaches for the Haymond Church of Christ, which is about six miles from Whitesburg in Eastern Kentucky. Darrell G. Wright is a preacher and “Pastor” of the Bible Baptist Church of Colson. It was the first debate for both disputants. Each is to be commended for publicly defending his position and allowing his position to be challenged and scrutinized. Despite the fact that this was brother Hall’s first attempt at debating, he capably defended the truth. God has put his power in his word (Rom. 1:16; Heb. 4:12). Paul said, “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. These things we also speak . . .” (1 Cor. 2:12-13). What brother Hall may have lacked in experience, he overcame by speaking the “things” the apostles spoke. No one can defeat the wisdom of God’s word.

Each speaker was given one 25 minute speech followed by a 30 minute speech. Afterwards, those in attendance were given an opportunity to submit their own questions to the speakers. Each speaker was then allowed two minutes to respond to the question. Andy Alexander served as moderator for the debate.

Baptism Is For The Remission of Sins

Brother Hall was well prepared to affirm his proposition. He used the following passages to make his affirmative. In Mark 16:15-16, Jesus gives a universal command, “He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” This passage teaches salvation is conditional. Belief + baptism = salvation. Brother Hall used Acts 2:37-38 to show how the words of Jesus in the Great Commission were fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. After hearing the gospel proclaimed, some were “cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, `Men and brethren, what shall we do?’ Then Peter said to them, `Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.”‘ Those who believed + were baptized (for the remission of sins) = saved (Acts 2:41, 47).

With just two passages discussed, any honest soul could see that brother Hall had successfully affirmed his proposition from the word of God. The Scriptures teach (Acts 2:38, “Then Peter said unto them) water baptism to the penitent believer is (Repent and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ) for the remission of sins (for the remission of sins”).

Brother Hall continued his affirmative discussing other passages which support the proposition. From 1 Peter 3:20-21, it was shown that God teaches us that baptism “now” saves us. It is the doctrine of men which teaches baptism does “not” save us. An effective argument was made from Galatians 3:26-27, “For you are (present condition) all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For (indicating the cause of present condition) as many of you as were baptized (past action) into Christ have put on Christ.” These passages plainly teach it is impossible to be saved and to be a child of God unless one has been baptized for the remission of sins.

Mr. Wright was never able to answer any of these arguments from the Scriptures. An attempt was made by Mr. Wright to sway the audience by showing a chart which dealt with “Pet Verses of the church of Christ.” These verses included Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16; 1 Pet. 3:21; Acts 22:16; John 3:5. Such an argument had no force since his responsibility was to show that these Scriptures do not teach that water baptism is for the remission of sins and this he totally failed to do.

He tried to elude the majority of Scripture by teaching 91% of the Bible applies to Jews only and 9% to Gentiles. To support his argument, he gave what he referred to as contradictions in the Bible. One example he used as a contradiction was Matthew 19:17, “keep the commandments” and Romans 3:20, “by the deeds of the law, no flesh will be justified.” According to Mr. Wright, all contradictions arise when one takes Jewish passages and applies them to Gen-tiles. He applied his argument to Acts 2:38. In Acts 2:22, Peter referred to Jews, “men of Israel, hear these words.” Therefore, this would limit the command of verse 38, “re-pent and be baptized for the remission of sins” to Jews only. Mr. Wright argued that anytime we try to apply what Jesus and Peter taught concerning baptism to what Paul taught concerning salvation by grace (Eph. 2:8) contradictions would occur. This would be avoided, according to him, if we stuck to the 9% of the Bible which applies to Gentiles, Romans through Philemon.

Using such mentality, his response to the “pet verses of the church of Christ” mentioned above was “I just throw that out.” The only passage which he attempted to address was Galatians 3:26-27. His response to baptism in this pas-sage was that it was the Holy Spirit baptism of 1 Corinthians 12:13. However, not once did he define what it is or how one receives it.

Mr. Wright spent part of his second speech trying to ex-plain that he did not mean to say the Bible contradicts itself. Yet, on the other hand, he continued using his argument on Bible contradictions concerning the baptism of Jesus and Peter and the gospel of Paul. Using a premillennial time line, he referred to six different gospels mentioned in the Scriptures: of John the Baptist, Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others. Since Paul preached the “gospel for the uncircumcision,” as Gentiles we must follow his gospel which, according to Mr. Wright, was not a gospel of baptism (Gal. 2:7; 1 Cor. 1:17), but of grace (Eph. 2:8). Brother Hall clearly showed that Paul not only received the baptism which Christ commanded and Peter preached (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16), but Paul also preached it (Eph. 2:8; Acts 19:1-5, 18).

By the end of the first night, everyone could see that Wright was wrong. His attitude toward the Scriptures be-came the proverbial thorn in his flesh. Even the audience members could see through the absurdity of such an argument that the Bible contradicts itself. This could be seen in their questions to Mr. Wright.

Salvation By Faith Alone

The second night found Mr. Wright affirming his proposition. Mr. Wright started off on his left foot. The first passage he referred to was Hebrews 11:1 which the night before he had tried to eliminate from the debate as being part of the 91% of the Bible which applies to Jews only. From this passage, he argued that faith is unseen. There-fore, one who is saved must put his faith in the unseen shed blood of Jesus Christ and not in the seen ordinance of water baptism. Every example given of faith in Hebrews 11 contradicts Mr. Wright’s understanding of faith. He followed this mistake by reading Romans 8:24, “For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees?” Mr. Wright made another wrong by showing the Scriptures teach we are saved by hope. Therefore, we are not saved by faith alone. Unlike brother Hall who successfully defended his proposition with just two Scriptures, Mr. Wright had successfully defeated himself in just a few minutes.

Mr. Wright used apples to illustrate the “measure of faith” of Romans 12:3. One apple he cut into pieces applying it to those who put their faith in confession, repentance, baptism, and Christ. Another apple he left whole to represent putting faith alone in Jesus Christ, which represented Mr. Wright’s faith. Brother Hall responded by showing the Scriptures teach we are saved by grace (Eph. 2:8), mercy (Tit. 3:5), the gospel (1 Cor. 15:1-2), blood (Col. 1:14, 20), faith (Rom. 5:1), works (Jas. 2:24), obedience (Heb. 5:9), baptism (1 Pet. 3:21), and hope (Rom. 8:24). Mr. Wright accepted all the passages which fell within the books of Romans through Philemon, but argued grace, mercy, the gospel, faith, and hope are just part of faith. This statement contradicted his apple illustration.

He had claimed his faith was only in Jesus Christ. Contradicting his own proposition, now he had admitted his faith involved several elements. He refused to respond to the passages which he felt applied to Jews only saying, “I just throw that out.” Mr. Wright clearly showed his doctrine also contradicted the Scriptures. Several times Mr. Wright appealed to his knowledge of the Scriptures. He referred to the fact that he had read through the Bible several times and that he had memorized the first nine chapters of the book of Romans. However, for someone who claimed to be so well versed, he failed to show the Scriptures teach one is saved by faith alone. His remaining arguments defeated his proposition. He spent a great deal of time just reading Romans 4 and 5. Using Paul’s teaching concerning faith and the righteousness of Abraham, he tried to demonstrate that it was Abraham’s faith alone which made him righteous. However, just because one reads through the Bible, memorizes chapters upon chapters, then announces his belief and cites some passages that mention faith does not make those passages teach faith alone.

Brother Hall responded by showing the Scriptures do not teach that Abraham was made righteous by faith alone. Using the text of James 2:14-26, it was shown faith without works is dead, the devils have faith and are not righteous, Abraham’s faith was made perfect by works, and the Bible plainly says “a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.”

Conclusion

The question and answer period following the discussion found Mr. Wright in more hot water. In responding to some of the questions, Mr. Wright bragged about being a Gentile of which Jesus said were dogs. He bragged about being a liar, stretching the truth to save his skin, and lusting after women (even with his wife and children in the audience). Furthermore, he believed one who had put his faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ would be saved and go to heaven even if he was a drunkard. As I heard him make such statements, the importance of the debate was brought to mind. Souls were at stake. The Bible plainly teaches those who practice such will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11). The purpose of this debate was to bring this error to light in order that souls might know the truth.

I know there are brethren who feel they are too dignified for debate, that taking the arguments of those who teach error and exposing the hypocrisy of their doctrine in light of the word of God is cruel and harsh. I overheard one of Mr. Wright’s companions say that brother Hall and those who assisted him appeared angry. Yet, have you wondered how the Lord would deal with a man who teaches a doctrine that will lead precious souls to hell? To see how the Lord would handle such an individual, read Matthew 23 which discusses Jesus’ thoughts concerning those “who travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as your-selves” (verse 15).

I appreciate the willingness of both men to engage in such a format. It is commendable to find such an attitude in the age of unity in diversity. Especially, I appreciate brother Gaddy Hall and the brethren in his area who supported him as he exposed this false teaching and its teacher. As he mentioned a couple of times during the debate, he came to show what God’s word said concerning baptism for the remission of sins and salvation by faith alone. It would be the responsibility of those who heard the truth to accept it or reject it.

Although no one obeyed the gospel, the precious seed was sown. God gives the increase (1 Cor. 3:6). Only time will tell what the produce will be.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 11 p. 21-22
June 5, 1997

By Jeff Kepler

At a dance, the focus is on the other person’s body, how it looks and how it moves. The movements are sexual, the tone is sexual, and the atmosphere is of sexual stimulation.

Dancing Defined

In a time where million dollar words and fancy arguing are supposed to be the keys to successful persuasion, let me spare you the time. All I want to do is give you facts. These may be facts that you might already know, and if this is the case, I would like to “stir you up by way of reminder” (2 Pet. 1:13; 13:1). If these are new facts to you, I’m glad you are reading this now. They are simple facts  facts that are undisputed. Facts that you can hold on to as truth. Besides, after you wipe away all the big words and fancy talk, all you have are facts anyway.

When talking about dancing, you must know there are different types of dances. This article will not address all types of dancing. Why? Because you can’t lump all dances under the heading of dancing and talk about them the same. There are different kinds. Folk dances, a dance for joy, dances mentioned in the Old Testament, ball-room dancing, the modern dance, square dancing, and I guess even round dancing. By saying this I do not mean that I approve of these, but we need to know that each case of dancing needs to be dealt with by itself. In this article we will be discussing the modem dance.

You will find the modem dance in many places. It is this very dance that is offered by our school systems, all the way from kindergarten to high school, on such occasions as Home-coming, Valentine’s Day, and Prom. Anytime during this article when I mention dance or dancing, I am refer-ring to this particular dance. This dance involves close physical contact of the parties involved, as well as gyration movements. This dance is associated with rock, punk, new age, heavy metal, hip hop, R&B, and rap music. The movements of this dance are wild gyrations and explicit sexual movements with sexual overtones. Much of the music involved in this dance has sexual language and suggestions as well.

This modern dance is defined in the following way: (1) consists in rhythmical movement of any or all parts of the body in accordance with some type of emotion or idea (the focus is on the body). (2) Movements of the body, creating an infectious response, the two-way process of motion and (sexual) emotion. This dance has a purpose.

Let’s Go to a Dance

Let’s take a factual look at this dance as is offered by our schools. Dads, Moms, I want you to think about your beautiful daughter God has blessed you with. As she goes to the dance, your daughter’s body will be the main focus as she is on the dance floor. The boys will be looking at your daughter’s body and watching how she moves it and how she gyrates it to music. The boy dancing with her or across the room is being stimulated by how your daughter is moving her body and, most likely adding to that, what she is wearing. As she moves her body around and as the boys look at her body, she is expressing the desire for others to look at her and enjoy what they see as she moves around. Also during this dance, your daughter is focusing on the boy’s body and how he is moving and gyrating it in front of her. Dads, Moms, I want you to think about your wonderful son God has blessed you with. Yes, he is one of the “boys” mentioned above if he at-tends this dance. Your son is watching a girl’s body as she moves it and gyrates it to music. As your son is focusing on her body, your son is immediately turned on sexually. His sexual desire has been ignited and the movements of a girl’s body feeds this lustful reaction. He then in turn moves his body around for her to see. You see, at a dance, the focus is on the other person’s body, how it looks and how it moves. The movements are sexual, the tone is sexual, and the atmosphere is of sexual stimulation. Bodies close, touching, rubbing together  stimulating sexual thoughts and desires.

What is the Purpose?

What is the purpose of the modern dance, the one so popular among our young people? Can it be for harmless fun and exercise? Some use this as a defense. During the slow periods of dance, with two people rubbing their bodies together, is this exercise? No. If it was exercise that was needed during the Homecoming or Prom, wouldn’t it be just the same if you had all of the students get together for an hour or two of a gym class? I think not. So much for exercise. Can it be just because “it’s what you do now”? Is it just because it’s the “in” thing? Schools use these ideas as their reasoning to have a dance because they want to get the kids together in a social atmosphere, but it is not the purpose of the dance itself. What is the answer? What is the purpose of this dance? Well, the purpose of this dance can be seen in its origin. It had its be-ginning in brothels and road houses where prostitutes work. This dance was originally known as the “art of seducers.” Prostitutes did and still do use this dance to sexually stimulate the one who is paying her to have sex. It is the entrance to fornication. This is the purpose of this dance. To lead to fornication. Read the following quotes from those that use and promote this type of dancing. “Dancing’s charm is based on sex appeal”; “Dancing is used as a doorway to sex. You must first arouse the desires then you fulfill them …”; “Dancing is the easiest and surest way to turn on a boy.” All of those that I have seen that describe this dance, that teach this dance, that pro-mote this dance in their establishments, do so using a common word. That word is sex.

Ladies and gentlemen, brothers and sisters, there you have it. Our children are being pressured in being involved with an activity that is sexually driven. Our school officials can deny it, and say that it is good clean fun, but in reality, and according to the facts, it is dirty not clean. They may not mean for this to be the purpose, but it is. Facts are facts. When your son and/or daughter goes to a dance, they are associating with sexual sins and prostitutes. Do you want your daughter to be a prostitute for the boys she goes to school with? Do you want boys to think of her as a girl of sexual per-version?

Our God Speaks

There is a word that God himself uses and he says that anyone guilty of it will burn in everlasting hell. The word is lasciviousness. (Some versions use the word sensuality or lewdness. Definitions apply to all.) We better know what the word means because God uses it. This word can be seen within Scripture (Mark 7:21-22; 2 Cor. 12:20-21; Gal. 5:19; 1 Pet. 4:3). The word means: “Absence of restraint, in-decency, wantonness, lust, excess wanton desires, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males and females, tending to produce lewd emotions, shamelessness, exciting sexual desires, one that has a characteristic of lust.” That definition really, really sounds familiar doesn’t it? Where did we see those same words? Yes, you are right in the definition of dancing. The same words that define lasciviousness define dance. If the dance we are talking about does not involve “indecent bodily movements, or unchaste handling of males and females, or exciting sexual desires” it would be beyond my mind to know what is. The fact is, these two, dancing and lasciviousness are the same thing! Now really read Galatians 5:19. Go on, read it. Putting everything together now, we have this formula: Dancing = Lasciviousness and lasciviousness = will not inherit the kingdom of God (death in hell). You see the “good clean fun” has now turned into the loss of a soul. The Lord has spoken. We better listen. God says if you are involved in lasciviousness, you will lose your soul in hell. Dancing is a sin against God and punishable by death.

We have to face these facts. You can’t say “I disagree with you, Jeff.” I haven’t said anything. I have just given you undisputed facts. You can’t change the facts. But I fear you’ll try. You might disagree with what you have read. You might be mad. You might not even care. But that doesn’t change it. I fear you will lose your soul, and possibly cause your child to lose his soul out of your failure to teach them God’s word on this matter because you want to do what you want and you want to have fun, or you want your kid to have fun. God sees it different, and the only way you or I will get in heaven is if we act and think like our Father.

An Exercise

If you are still not convinced, do the following exercise. Look up the following verses and as you read each one, look back at the definition of dancing. How does it hold up to the will of your God? It’s the word you will be judged by against what man has to offer.

Dancing

Wild Gyrations  Explicit Sexual Movements and Over-tones  Focusing On The Body  Sex Appeal  Arousing Desires  Sexual Stimulation (Matt. 5:27-28; Rom. 14:21; 1 Tim. 1:16; 1 Thess. 5:21-22; 1 Cor. 8:12-13; Jas. 4:4; Eph. 5:11; Rom. 12:9; 13:13-14; Matt. 18:5-7; 1 Pet. 4:1-19; Matt. 7:16-20; 1 Cor. 15:33; 2 Tim. 2:2; 1 Tim. 2:9; 1 Cor. 6:18-20; 1 Pet. 3:1-2; Matt. 6:13; 1 Thess. 4:3-8; Gal. 5:16-21; Matt. 5:16; Phil. 1:27; 1 Pet. 2:11; Matt. 15:16).

After you do this, do one more thing. Look at the following questions. What conclusions do you come up with as you honestly answer these questions?

1. Why are there chaperons at dances? If the dance is not sexual in nature, why do you need chaperons? (Quotes from those who chaperoned a dance, “I got tired of moving hands back where they should be,” “I know for a fact I’m needed more after the kids leave the dance than in here. In the gym they just stimulate each other, later they are driven to fulfill those lusts.”)

2. Would Jesus dance? Would he be involved in sexual gyrations and movements? Would Jesus chaperon a dance?

3. Could you dance under the cross of your bleeding Savior?

4. If this dance is not “sexually” natured, then try having all the boys just dance with each other. There should be no problem if it does not have a sexual overtone, should there?

5. If dancing is OK, I think we should have one for the adults of this congregation. Would you like me to dance with your wife like we have described? If you attempt to dance with my wife, I’d give you a knuckle sandwich!

6. If the boys and girls do the same movements involved in this dance, without music, they would be in big, big trouble? Would you like your son or daughter to do these dance movements in a car?

Guardian of Truth XLI: 11 p. 18-20
June 5, 1997

By Daniel H. King Sr.

As we drive along the highways of our land, we are often confronted with alternate routes which we may take to get to where we wish to travel. Our choice, whether to go in one direction or the other, may take us to entirely different destinations, widely separated both as to geographical location and type of scenery we shall view, whether mountains, valleys, oceans, or deserts.

Life in general is very much the same as driving down the highway. When we encounter various choices in our lives, we too often pass them off as having little importance in terms of the direction of our existence or of the future, but very often they are monumental and even historic in terms of our own particular circumstances and eventual spiritual destination.

The Bible, in several places, grapples with this notion of making choices which critically touch upon the overall direction and bearing of the soul. What brings me to consider this matter is my recent rereading of the story of King Zedekiah and the people of Jerusalem during the days of the prophet Jeremiah. Israel was under attack from Nebuchadnezzar and the armies of Babylon. When the king sent to inquire of the prophet as to how he should proceed, in hopes that the Lord would be gracious and grant Jerusalem a reprieve from this malevolent man and his brutal armies, Jeremiah told the people to surrender. Now this was not what the king or his nobles wanted to hear! And you can imagine how traitorous it must have sounded for the prophet of God to make such a suggestion. But Jeremiah explained that there were only two directions to go here, and neither of them a very happy alternative, but one would at least save their lives.

After he had defined the two possibilities, the seer put the options in these terms: “Thus saith Jehovah: Behold, I set before you the way of life and the way of death” (Jer. 21:8). There was no middle ground, no third or more desirable choice. That was it. The prophet continued: “He that abideth in this city shall die by the sword, and by the famine, and by the pestilence; but he that goeth out, and passeth over to the Chaldeans that besiege you, he shall live, and his life shall be unto him for a prey. For I have set my face upon this city for evil, and not for good, saith Jehovah: it shall be given into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall burn it with fire” (Jer. 21:9-10).

The way of surrender is no more easy for us today than it was for them when Jeremiah set it before King Zedekiah and his princes. But it is the way of life, for us as it was for them. One cannot fight against God (Acts 5:39). How difficult it is to make this spiritual capitulation is illustrated in the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. On the Damascus road Jesus said to him, “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks” (Acts 9:5). Still later, he was three days without sight and did neither eat nor drink (v. 9) till finally Ananias came in to him and commanded him to be baptized: “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on his name” (Acts 22:16). Spiritual surrender is ever a difficult choice to make, but it is the way of life!

Again, it is pictured in the record of a hardened jailor’s transformation, as told by Luke in Acts 16. At midnight he was roused from sleep by an earthquake which threw wide the doors of the prison and loosed the prisoner’s bonds. He drew his sword to take his own life, supposing that all the prisoners had escaped, but heard the voice of Paul from within, a voice which only a few moments before had caroled hymns of praise to God, telling him to do himself no harm, since none of the prisoners was gone. Calling for lights, he rushed into the chamber where only a while be-fore he had locked their feet fast in the stocks. He then fell down at their feet and asked what he needed to do to be saved (v. 30). He had surrendered! He had relinquished control to the Lord of his prisoners, Paul and Silas. He decided to travel the way of life.

The same thing is illustrated in the metamorphosis of those people who came to compose the church in Ephesus.

The city was the cult-center of the goddess Artemis, or Diana as the Romans called her. Her temple at Ephesus was so majestic that it was considered by first-century tourists to be one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. Much of the town’s economic and cultural life was bound up with that heathen deity, her mythology, priesthood, altar, and sacrifice. In A.D. 52 Paul the apostle traveled to the city and began to teach the people about Jesus Christ. After a notable miracle wrought by Paul, the response of these once-pagan citizens of Ephesus was overwhelming: “And this became known to all, both Jews and Greeks, that dwelt at Ephesus; and fear fell upon them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified. Many also of them that had believed came, confessing, and declaring their deeds. And not a few of them that practiced magi-cal arts brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all; and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of the Lord and prevailed” (Acts 19:17-20). They had chosen to surrender, and along with that spiritual submission, they had decided to travel the way of life rather than the way of death.

“Behold, I set before you the way of life and the way of death,” the Lord told Zedekiah and his nobles. And the way of life was the way of surrender. It is no different today. In all these cases, and many more like them that could be marshaled from the pages of Holy Writ, men were forced to lay down their arms and relinquish control to him who makes his prisoners his willing slaves, then exalts them to glory. Let us also choose the way of life!

Guardian of Truth XLI: 11 p. 16-17
June 5, 1997

By Andy Alexander

The Lord’s appeal through the gospel is spiritual, while Satan’s appeal is through the flesh or carnal (Gal. 5:16-25; 1 John 2:15-17). In this article we want to notice some of the carnal appeals that Satan uses to keep people in darkness or lure Christians out of the light and back into his kingdom. These carnal appeals of Satan can be clearly seen among those in Ephesus who opposed the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Luke records the efforts and results of the apostle Paul and his companions in Ephesus as they carried out the commission of Jesus Christ (Acts 19). Paul preached the gospel of Christ and at the same time exposed the religious frauds that existed in that area of Asia Minor (Acts 19:1-17). A positive effect of Paul’s preaching in Ephesus was that people repented of their sins, turned to Christ, and the “Word of God grew mightily and prevailed” (Acts 19:18-20). A negative result was that those in error with hardened hearts refused to obey the gospel and sought to destroy the faith of those who did (Acts 19:21-41).

Several different carnal arguments were used in an effort to hinder or destroy the success of the gospel in Ephesus. Let’s notice these various carnal appeals and some examples in our day of the exact same appeals made by Satan. Awareness of these fleshly appeals should help us avoid these deadly traps of Satan.

Wealth

Wealth was used by Satan to blind the eyes of those in Ephesus. “Demetrius, a silversmith, who made silver shrines of Diana” recognized that the gospel could destroy his prosperity (Acts 19:24-25). He stirred up others of his trade and created much confusion. Why would Demetrius not want to obey the truth? Money! Wealth! Materialism! These were his gods and he was not going to give them up for the truth.

Pocketbook religion is all the religion that Demetrius knew and many today follow that same god. They check their pocketbook first and if it going to cost them some-thing financially to serve the Lord, they are not willing to do it.

This carnal appeal is made by many denominational churches today. They preach a gospel of health and wealth. They claim that if you give, give, and give more to their false religion, that you will receive back more in material goods than you gave originally. It sounds good, but the root of the appeal is carnality and its not the appeal of the Spirit.

Successful Religion

Success of the religion was another avenue used by Satan to keep people trapped in false religion. In his effort to create confusion and win supporters, Demetrius said, “so not only is this trade of ours in danger of falling into disrepute, but also the temple of the great goddess Diana may be despised and her magnificence destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worship” (Acts 19:27). What if all Asia and the whole world worshiped the goddess Diana? Would that prove the religion true? Can truth be determined by counting heads?

There are many people in our day who believe like Demetrius. They gather in their religious conventions, councils, or synods and vote on various Bible doctrines, as if a majority vote will change God’s will. The Psalmist said concerning the permanent nature of God’s Word, “For ever, 0 Jehovah, Thy word is settled in heaven” (Ps. 119:89). Some denominational bodies have voiced their approval of homosexuality, abortion, and other sins, but their vote, even if unanimous, cannot change the mind of God.

The appeal of some denominations is to their worldwide success. The Jehovah’s Witnesses denomination points to their world headquarters with pride. When questioned about various aspects of their doctrine that are contrary to the doctrine of Christ, they frequently point to their worldwide success as proof that their erroneous doctrine is acceptable with God. They say something like, “We couldn’t be world-wide if God wasn’t with us” or “Our great success proves that God is with us.” These things do not prove any such thing. What would an appeal to numbers have proved in Noah’s day? Being in the majority in Sodom and Gomorrah carried no weight with God (Gen. 19).

If success or being in the majority was equivalent to having the truth, then we should look for the largest religious sect and join with them. That would make Catholics, Hindus, Muslims, or something else out of all of us. This likely would not appeal to many who use success as a measure of truth.

Emotionalism

Emotionalism is another ploy used by Satan. There is a place in the gospel for emotion. When we learn that Jesus went to the cross and died for our sins, our emotions ought to be affected. We hear the preaching of the cross, become convicted of sins, and obey the gospel for the forgiveness of those sins, our hearts should rejoice. This is the order found in the New Testament. People heard the gospel, responded to the gospel by confessing their faith in Jesus, repenting of their sins, and being baptized for the forgiveness of sins, then rejoiced at the fact that they were new creatures in Christ (Acts 8:35-39; 2:36-42). Emotion follows the understanding. This is the pattern of truth.

Satan uses emotions to override the understanding. People swayed by their emotions instead of the truth will be stirred to the point of ignoring the truth for a “better felt than told” feeling. Assemblies of this sort are often full of confusion and commotion, with little, if any, Bible instruction taking place.

In Ephesus, the city was filled with confusion and a crowd gathered in the local theater. A man by the name of Alexander wanted to make a reasoned defense of Christianity, but when it was discovered that he was a Jew “all with one voice cried out for about two hours, `Great is Diana of the Ephesians”‘ (Acts 19:34). Keep the people confused so that they cannot hear and understand the truth is a tactic that works well for Satan. The people’s ability to stop, think, and examine what they believe is overruled by their emotions.

God teaches us to study, learn, and obey his will (2 Tim. 2:15; Acts 17:11; Matt. 11:28-30; 7:21). The assemblies of the churches of Christ in the first century were to be conducted decently and in order (1 Cor. 14:40). The members of the congregation should be edified and they should be able to understand in such a way that they may be able to say “amen” to the prayers that are offered unto God (1 Cor. 14:26, 16). Visitors to their assemblies should also be able to understand the Word of God (1 Cor. 14:23-25).

The holiness, charismatic Pentecostal groups of our day conduct services where confusion reigns supreme. Prayers are uttered and everyone begins to mumble aloud so that nothing can be understood and no true “amen” could be said. It is nothing more than confusion being carried on in the name of the Lord. Studying the truth, learning the difference between right and wrong, and examining the Word of God is far removed from these assemblies. The whole atmosphere is geared toward entertainment and not true worship unto God.

Tradition

Tradition is also used by Satan to prevent people from responding in a positive way to the truth. Satan could not make his appeal to truth, but he could appeal to what the people had always believed. The city clerk of Ephesus made a statement to the crowd in the theater after he had quieted them. He said, “Men of Ephesus, what man is there who does not know that the city of the Ephesians is temple guardian of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Zeus?” Implied in this statement is the idea that Diana has been worshiped for years in Ephesus and any religion that has been around as long this one could not be wrong. “We have always believed in Diana and we always will” is the appeal to traditionalism.

The fact that someone has always believed something to be true does not make it true. For centuries many scientists believed the world to be flat. Did this long-standing belief or tradition make it flat?

This attitude is alive today. The Catholic Church, the Episcopal Church, and many mainstream denominations are built around what their forefathers believed. It matters not to them that the truth condemns their practices (Col. 3:17). Infant baptism, sprinkling substituted for immersion, Christmas and Easter observances, and instrumental music are just a few of their traditions that are completely foreign to the Scriptural worship and practice of the New Testament church. Jesus said of the traditionalists of his day, “And in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9).

Conclusion

These tactics, wealth, success, emotionalism, and traditionalism, are effective tools of Satan. He will use these individually or he will combine them to make them more appealing. He will thread them together to make them appear stronger, but these false appeals cannot stand up to the power of the gospel. Let’s be aware of these carnal appeals and not succumb to the temptation to use these appeals in-stead of the gospel of Jesus which is “the power of God unto salvation” (Rom. 1:16).

Guardian of Truth XLI: 11 p. 14-15
June 5, 1997