In the first two parts of this series, we looked at just a tiny part of the criticism directed at the traditional family – husband and wife, plus any children they may have.  Much of the criticism, but not exclusively, comes from those intent on pushing the sexual agenda emanating from LGBT+ issues.   With the uptake in different ungodly lifestyles, removal of existing norms is seen as necessary to accommodate the new “freedom” to do what they want and that is expressed as contempt to what the great God of the Bible stated in His Word at the dawn of civilisation.

Another criticism can be read in fee.org. “Even today the aversion to the traditional family remains strong in socialists.  A 2019 article in The Nation, titled “Want to Dismantle Capitalism? Abolish the Family,” offers a glimpse of the modern socialist critique of the institution.

“We know that the nuclear private household is where the overwhelming majority of abuse can happen,” author Sophie Lewis explains. “And then there’s the whole question of what it is for: training us up to be workers, training us to be inhabitants of a binary-gendered and racially stratified system, training us not to be queer.”

“For true believers of collectivism, there’s little question that private family matters are also state matters. Socialism requires collective control of resources, and humans are the ultimate resource. This is why the traditional nuclear family, which places authority in the hands of parents rather than the community, is an affront to so many socialists.”

To be clear, we thoroughly condemn this socialist, communist and fascist approach, as it would give the ungodly state total control over the people.

Timothy P Carney wrote the following in the Washington Examiner, on December 17, 2020:

“In Alienated America, I argue that strong communities need strong families and vice versa. Where community breakdown occurs, it’s often the fruit of family breakdown. Children raised by only a mother are at a disadvantage, but their neighbors suffer, too, because that mother (probably working full time and charged with all household duties) is less available to coach, volunteer, or just sit on the front porch keeping an eye on things.

“Marriage implies permanence, dedication, and commitment. Communities need those things. Less marriage means weaker communities.

“Raj Chetty’s research, in fact, suggests that having many households with two married parents is the best way to guarantee the upward mobility of children.”

An older, but still very relevant essay published by docslib outlines the grim reality of “The Decline of the Traditional Family”:

“The traditional family today has been transformed into a post-modernistic family, as the modern culture has pulled apart the connected bonds of a family. Our popular television shows today portray wrong visualizations to their commonly young audience with inappropriate content and family morals.  The ‘Little House on the Prairie’ TV series, popular in the late 1900’s, was a refreshing family show that portrayed the common traditional family in that era.  However, new TV series accentuate today’s post-modernized family that makes untraditional family morals desirable for their viewers. One of the newest series ‘Modern Family’ portrays the life of three modern related families of today, including same-sex partners with an adopted child.  The appeal to be like the celebrities on these post-modernistic shows are draining away the traditional values families should have.  However, ‘Modern Family’ is one of the top TV series today, winning up to 11 Emmys.

“This essay will focus on the core of the decline of the traditional family as divorces, abortions, same sex marriages, and ignorance of biblical principles increase daily-making our present families diverse from tradition.

“The government is also encouraging the destruction of the traditional family.  One example is the rising of same-sex marriages.  The title, ‘Ex-Lesbian: Obama Destroying Traditional Families,’ is as shocking as it sounds.  Janet Boynes, a former lesbian, is now the leader of her Christian ministry called Janet Boynes Ministries, where she ministers to individuals who either question their sexuality or wish to leave a homosexual lifestyle.  Janet affirms that it is hard to keep the values [of] traditional family ideals today, because our current generation and government powers are advocating rights for homosexuals. Ms Boynes mentions that President Barack Obama is using the financial governmental power to encourage people to accept and normalize same-sex relationships!  This rips apart the picture of the traditional husband and wife.

“The government’s intentional ignoring of Biblical values are affecting the children of America. The children’s educational system that used to be taught with Biblical-based principles is now the design of a humanistic, person-centered program that is corrupting our future traditional families with immoral doctrines.  The ability to pray or talk about God’s love is banished from the classroom and discouraged from children’s vocabulary!  Parental consent is also considered unneeded for the health of their children.

“Today, traditional family values are being destroyed as if crushed by a huge rock.  Matthew 5:13 says, ‘Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt has lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted?  It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.’  The children of today have lost their identity, living opposite to the Bible!  

“We must stay strong to the faith and proclaim God’s Commandments to all!   Together, let us empower ourselves with the determination, as one nation under God, to revolutionize our future and bring back the traditional family.”

In the Daily Mail, dated Monday, Feb 13th 2023, one of the headlines was: “I’m a psychologist and these are 13 reasons why people DON’T want to get married anymore – and why staying single makes you happier.”   It went on to say:

“If you are about to have a baby, chances are you are more likely to be unmarried than married.  Figures from the Office of National Statistics (in the UK) show that 2021 was the first year on record that more children were born out of wedlock than in it. It follows a long-term trend of declining marriage rates and rising numbers of cohabiting couples seen in recent decades.

“Explaining the decline, Dr Max Blumberg, a relationship psychologist and chartered member of the British Psychological Society, says that marriage no longer offers what it used to.” 

Below is how he breaks down exactly why the traditional institution is on the way out.  We have deliberately not quoted the text under the headings except for number 11, as this was too long to quote in its entirety.

1. Traditional reasons for marriage no longer matter 
2. People marry when they are happy (and we are less happy)
3. Growing acceptance of cohabiting
4. High divorce rates paint a bad picture
5. No evidence to show that marriage makes you happier and healthier (especially for women)
6. Cost of weddings
7. Marriage is not promoted by UK government
8. Women are fine doing motherhood alone
9. People don’t want to invest
10. Being born out of wedlock is no longer a social disgrace
11. Sexual fluidity

The younger generations are far more likely to be open minded than older generations. An increasing number are gay or lesbian or pansexual, as well as being gender fluid. If people want to date people of differing and varied sexes, then again marriage is less likely to be an option, particularly as the church does still not support gay marriage.

12. Lack of married role models
13. Sexual liberation and the pill 

We could respond to each of the items above but that could seem somewhat tedious and the answers are pretty obvious!

Julie Roys, a speaker, freelance journalist and blogger in the USA wrote: “A little known fact about socialism is that, from its beginning, it has sought to destroy marriage and family. In the USA, Grove City Professor Paul Kengor explains this in detail in his book, ‘Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Marriage and Family.’ Essentially, what socialism seeks is for the state to replace the family. That way, it can indoctrinate children in its Leftist way of thinking, and remove from them any notions of God and religion.

“Friedrich Engels, co-author with Marx of the ‘The Communist Manifesto,’ once wrote that the society he envisioned would be one where ‘the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair.’”

We hasten to add that this is not only true for socialist or communist societies, but also for fascist regimes which try to control their people. National Socialism under Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler would be prime examples. 

In a paper “Redefining the Family: Undermining the Family,” by John DeWitt Gregory” from the University of Chicago Legal Forum, the following snippet is interesting: “In addition to casebook editors and treatise writers, professorial contributions of legal scholarship in law reviews have contributed frequently and at length to efforts to redefine the family. One prominent commentator, for example, has stated bluntly: [Our] society has undergone profound transformations in the past century, and the long-standing legal structure of marriage may now be anachronistic. The state’s interest in preserving the traditional family may not be important enough to offset new societal and individual needs which require more flexibility and choice in family forms.”

On the website voiceofthefamily, we read how local government is usurping the authority of parents in raising their children in a family environment.  “A group of parents in Wales is asking the High Court to overrule a decision by the government in Cardiff to make attendance at sex education classes mandatory in local primary schools. When the Welsh government introduced a ‘new code’ for the teaching of ‘sex and relationships education’ (RSE) earlier this year, it removed the right of parents to withdraw their children from the lessons.

“Sadly, parents in the rest of the UK, the Irish Republic and across most of the Western world have already been confronted with the situation unfolding in Wales. And although the legal action against the Welsh government is unlikely to succeed, there is a strong body of international law aimed at protecting the family and the rights of parents. The fact that governments no longer respect these rights is the result of a strategy worked out decades ago by organisations, such as International Planned Parenthood Federation. These organisations, which have managed to seize control of the agencies established by the United Nations, are now sufficiently powerful to have their agenda enforced across the globe.”

We can see how those who want the rights of the godly-ordained family to be paramount are overridden by those who think that the state knows best.   The family is certainly under threat by bureaucrats who think that they know better than God who created the family 6,000 years ago.

The traditional family, according to the Word of God, is simply put: Marriage as God ordained it is between a man and a woman (Genesis 2:24).   For a more thorough exposition on this subject, please see our Q&A as mentioned in the second part in this series: https://www.eternalgod.org/what-is-a-family/

(To be continued)

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

The day of the “nuclear” family” – husband, wife and children – is no longer applicable. An article in “betterhelp” states: “Gone are the days when nuclear families (mom, dad + one or more kids) are considered the norm in the United States. These days, different family types are not only common but also much more accepted than they were in the past. It’s not uncommon to be raised by a single mother or be part of a mixed family. It seems more uncommon to live in a household where both parents are happily married, unfortunately, although many of those families do still exist.”

The family is under attack because of its importance. It is yet another attack on the family which God initiated some 6,000 years ago and has continued right down through the millennia attacking the family at every available opportunity. It would be fair to say that such attacks on the family will, somewhere, have the fingerprints of Satan on it.

So, first of all, let us look at those who are in favour of its removal or dismissal, undoubtedly with Satan somewhere in the mix.

In the New York Post in September 2020, it was confirmed that “Black Lives Matter scrubbed a page on its website this week that disparaged the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure….they removed a page titled ‘What We Believe’ that included its public policy positions as well as describing itself as part of the ‘global Black family.’  It read, before its removal, as follows:

“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

Noelle Mering in her book “Awake, Not Woke: A Christian Response to the Cult of Progressive Ideology” wrote the following: 

“Targeting of the family is intrinsic to the agenda of woke ideology precisely because of the way the family is meant to uphold the dignity of the person and serve as a bulwark against political tribalism. A healthy well-formed family is preventative; it provides the belonging and care that prepares one to walk confidently into adulthood. As the family is weakened, the pull toward tribalism grows, feeds, and repeats itself.”   

A review of her book states that ‘‘Awake, Not Woke’ unmasks this ideology by examining its history, major players, premises, and tactics, showing us that ‘Wokeness’ at its core is an ideology of rupture. Indeed, it is an ideology with fundamentalist and even cult-like characteristics that is on a collision course with Christianity.”  It goes on to say “This is a spiritual battle, and it is not accidental. The architects of revolution have long known that the transformation of the West had to come by way of destabilizing the social, familial, and religious pieties of a citizenry.”

Clearly, those who oppose God and His plan for humanity want to destroy the traditional family because it stands in the way of their desire to rule in God’s place.

John Deighan wrote in Faith Magazine (November-December 2007) the following, and these are but brief extracts from a long article, entitled, “The Undermining of the Family: Where are we at?”:

“The Church recognises the family as the building block of society and for good reason has carefully defended the understanding of family relationships and of human sexuality which is so intimately linked to the ordering of family life and the procreation of succeeding generations.

“Recent changes in legislation have transformed the legal understanding of family structure and human sexuality. These changes have been preceded by changes in the views being promoted in the culture shaping institutions of society such that there are now a considerable number of people in the areas of politics, law, media and education who are ready to implement a new agenda for family and social life.

“Issues around sexuality and sexual practice are therefore powerful factors in shaping public attitudes and concomitantly the policies of public authorities. An important aspect of this cultural development has been the influential presence of the homosexual movement in public life. The role of this movement as a tool to marginalise religion in society should not be overlooked. An overview of the progress of the homosexual movement in recent years is necessary to assess its rapid and startling success.

“To gain an insight into the end point aimed at by homosexual campaign groups it is useful to consider and the terms ‘homophobia’ and ‘heterosexist’. We need to understand what the abolition of the supposed social evils they label will achieve. The former is understood as dislike of homosexuality and the latter as the belief that heterosexuality is the norm. By working to get these recognised as social evils akin to racism or sexism it has been possible to get towards the goal, which is that homosexual behaviour is firmly accepted in society and that society should be indifferent to the form of relationships which individuals choose to enter or make the basis of their family lives.

“In 2000 we saw the removal of the law which prevented the promotion of homosexuality by local authorities (Clause 2a) because it was maintained that no-one would ever want to promote homosexuality.

“The next stage was the promotion of the concept that sexuality is not biologically determined but rather socially constructed. The Gender Recognition Act 2004 was introduced to allow individuals to choose their ‘gender’ and it is permissible to be of male sex and have a female gender.

“The Civil Partnership Act, passed in November 2004, raised homosexual relationships to the same status as marriage by granting the same rights to couples entering a civil partnership as to spouses entering marriage. 

“Having established that homosexual relationships are the same as heterosexual relationships, the next step of promoting homosexual relationships as equal in providing a suitable environment to raise children logically and actually followed. The adoption bill permitted homosexual couples jointly to adopt and in another strike against the status of marriage also allowed unmarried couples to adopt. This bill was given overwhelming approval by the Scottish Parliament in December 2006. 

“The homosexual lobby has been very effective in aligning itself with minority groups, is prominently represented at the Holocaust memorial service each year and has created an image of itself as a group of people under persecution. This further prepares the mood for dealing with those who oppose the homosexual lifestyle, or in fact not just those who oppose it but those who fail to approve it.”

We can see the “frog in boiling water” principle at work in the above account. The end product is that today, any group of people can live together and proclaim that they are a family. By biblical standards they are not, unless they conform to the biblical standard of a husband and wife and any children that they may have, which is something that society is trying to eliminate.

On the biblicalhealingrevolution website under their heading: “Is woke-ism trying to Eradicate Christianity and the family?” we read:

“Their agenda includes teaching our children critical race theory, child molestation, paedophilia, drag queen children’s shows, same-sex bathrooms, locker rooms, and men competing in woman’s sports.  Worse yet are puberty blockers, gender transformation, body mutilating sex-change surgeries for children, and yes even children sacrifice.”

We know that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33) but Satan the devil is, as he is trying his best to turn everyone, especially those called by God, away from the way that God wants us to live according to His Way of Life.

(To be continued)

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

On christiantoday.com, we read a typical repudiation of the order that God has set in the Church. Here is a brief extract:

“Another context we need to take into consideration was the cultural background of the time and proximity. The church of Corinth is not a congregation that was born two weeks ago. It was a church built by people of a different time and a different culture all together. What may mean something to us will mean something completely different to the people of that time.

“What was ancient Corinth like? It existed in a day and age and in a culture where it was more beneficial and secure for women to refuse certain cultural and societal roles — and leadership was one of them.

“But today, that’s no longer the case. It’s now safe and beneficial for women to lead. That gives all women just as much right to spiritually and strategically lead as men.”

What a flimsy argument that is, to be able to negate clear Scriptural instruction in order for women to do what they want to – and this article was written by a man!

1 Corinthians 14:37 is clear.  The apostle Paul wrote: 

“If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.”

He did not state his own opinion and he did not repeat the thoughts and ideas of another human being – but he proclaimed “the commandments of the Lord.” 

On placefortruth.org, Joseph Hamrick in June 2019 wrote an excellent article about the “Argument from Culture.” Below are a few selected comments from this presentation.

“There is an argument, not exactly new, that has been making its way through the church today. The argument from culture, let’s call it the argumentam ad culturam, is an attempt to undermine the legitimacy and primacy of Scripture for Christian living, while claiming to honor the Scripture for what ‘it really says.’ It is the basic hermeneutical assumption of the culturalists.

“This argument states that since Christ (or Peter, or John, or Paul, etc.) addressed people bound by a certain place, time, and culture, the message’s proscriptions and prescriptions are likewise bound by a certain place, time, and culture.  Scripture does not utter statements once and for all authoritative; rather, it records statements held to be authoritative once upon a time. Following proper and sometimes extensive adjustments, some authority may still hold for us (e.g., support orphans and widows); largely, however, that authority is now gone with the wind–as are the place, time, and culture in which they were uttered.

“The problem with argumentum ad culturum is those who use it miss the scriptural context they try to gloss. For them, misapprehension of the scripture hinges on a failure to understand a preposition.  That is, they are blind to the difference between making an argument to a culture and arguing from one. Christ, Paul, and others took the former route. Progressive Christians take the latter.

“As has been argued, Paul’s words, and Christ’s, are not merely cultural arguments, they are more. They are the very word of God, which cannot change.

“Culture cannot, and must not, dictate the word of God.”

The points made by Mr Hamrick are very well taken when he states that culture cannot “dictate the word of God.”

In a speech in 2022 to the Oxford Union debate on the Feast of the Presentation of the Lord, in opposition against “This House Supports Same-Sex Marriage in Church,” Calvin Robinson, an Anglican deacon, and Dr Ian Paul went up against the Bishop of Buckingham, the Bishop of Dudley and the Bishop of Worcester.   Again, we will quote excerpts from this presentation.

Mr Robinson said: “We are up against the authorities – three bishops from the Established Church. That means either I am wrong – and Christians have been teaching incorrectly on marriage for 2,000 years – or we have Church leaders attempting to drag the Church into apostasy.

“Suffice to say we lost the debate: 186 for, 41 against. I would like to thank those 41 sound students at Oxford who braved the lion’s den. It must be a very lonely place for them. 

“… Paul describes marriage as, ‘Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh,’ in which he is mirroring the language of Genesis, where God tells man and wife to ‘Be fruitful and multiply’.

“People will argue, ‘we know more about homosexuality now than we did then,’ maybe so. But are you then suggesting God knew less than we do now? For either all Scripture is God-breathed, or it isn’t. Either we believe Christ, or we don’t.

“Are we looking to alter the catechism of just the Anglican Church, or should the Catholic Church ‘get with the times’, too? 2,000 years of Christian doctrine and 4,000 years of Jewish doctrine cannot be altered at the whim of a few liberal bishops. What is God-ordained cannot be adjusted to suit our liberal progressive worldviews. Marriage is heterosexual and monogamous and should be open to the possibility of children.

“… Jesus talks of marriage in Mark and Matthew, both in the context of heterosexual union.

“So my question to the bishops would be, do we not believe in the authority of the Scriptures any more? Can we pick and choose which parts of the Gospel we adhere to?

“We are directly talking about undermining God’s plan as he has revealed it to us. We are replacing his authority with our own.

“Another one, we’ll hear plenty of is ‘inclusivity’. Shouldn’t the Church be more inclusive?

“Again, it’s a play on words people use to virtue signal. To appear good rather than being good.

“As Christians, we are called to be in the world but not of the world.”

Mr Robinson has also opposed the ordination of women.  His ordination in the Church of England was blocked after several bishops had expressed concerns about his outspoken views.  In essence, as his views were from the Bible and not politically correct in today’s permissive woke culture, he was “cancelled”.

On epm.org, we read: “After all, we are all influenced by the values of the times in which we live. A quick note, though. If we are rejecting the time-bound values of the Bible because we now have new values, how do we know that ours aren’t time-bound? In fact, how do we know that our culture’s values are not even worse? These are questions worth pondering.

“But to claim that the Bible simply reflects the viewpoints of its time is to misunderstand the Bible entirely. Far from simply being a product of its time, the teachings of the Bible consistently confront readers with counter-cultural messages. Even the creation narrative itself stands in contrasts to other ancient creation myths.”

One person wrote that “Many things in the Bible are unacceptable to modern Christians. Why? Because they do not sit right with contemporary moral sensibilities.”  

In 2021, a report headed “Social media manipulation by political actors an industrial scale problem” offered these findings:

“Oxford Internet Institute team warns the level of social media manipulation has soared, with governments and political parties spending millions on private sector ‘cyber troops’, who drown out other voices on social media. Citizen influencers are used to spread manipulated messages. These include volunteers, youth groups and civil society organisations, who support their ideologies. This activity has become professionalised, with private firms offering disinformation-for-hire services.”

In other words, the manipulating of people’s views and understanding on many issues can be shaped and activated to lead many down the path of the loudest and most influential voice.   It is almost inevitable that this will be against the clear teachings from the Word of God which is derided, dismissed, disparaged and ridiculed as being of non-effect in such an “enlightened” society.   Conformity is usually required.

It can be seen from even “Christian” sources that, allegedly, “many things in the Bible are unacceptable to modern Christians. Why? Because they do not sit right with contemporary moral sensibilities.”   In other words, in order for Christianity to be relevant to some/many people today, the Way of God has to be moulded and shaped to the requirements of contemporary society.

In conclusion, it seems that counterfeit Christianity is determined to be the arbiter of what is right and wrong—not the great Creator God (the Father) who created all things through Jesus Christ. The extraordinary arrogance and ego of man who thinks that he knows best is truly amazing!

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

In a Q&A in April 2017, entitled “Does God Change?” we quoted the following observations.  We have underlined key phrases:

“In an article in April 2015 in the New York Times, a columnist wrote: ‘And homosexuality and Christianity don’t have to be in conflict in any church anywhere. That many Christians regard them as incompatible is understandable, an example not so much of hatred’s pull as of tradition’s sway. Beliefs ossified over centuries aren’t easily shaken.  But in the end, the continued view of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as sinners is a decision. It’s a choice. It prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing. It disregards the degree to which all writings reflect the biases and blind spots of their authors, cultures and eras. It ignores the extent to which interpretation is subjective, debatable.’”

Can we see how subtle and deceptive this all is? The article goes on to show how “advances” in understanding have been made with respect to slavery, contraception, gender roles and same-sex marriages. This author and the people he quotes who share many of his views obviously think that they know better than God.

We continued in our Q&A:

“God does NOT change when it comes to the eternal truths that He has made clear in His Word. God has, and is, perfect character which cannot change and we have to have the spiritual insight and understanding to comprehend this, rather than lumping everything together. 

“Moral absolutes are just that – absolute. They cannot be changed and God does not change in this area.” 

We reviewed a few examples where God DID change His mind, but none of these changes involved alterations to His unalterable spiritual law. For example, Abraham debated with God how many righteous were to be found in Sodom and Gomorrah that would save it from destruction and he negotiated it down from 50 to 10 – but God does NOT change when it comes to the eternal Truths that He has made clear in His Word.

Another example we quote is in Numbers 14 which tells the story of Israel refusing to enter Canaan and instead of entering the land immediately, God changed this by deferring their entry for 40 years. These are just things of a temporary nature but nothing changes about God’s eternal Law.

A further example was when God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon the Ninevites – because of their repentance.

And so, let us look at the “culture of the time” argument.

You’ve no doubt heard this argument.   A while ago, the Episcopal church in the USA, which is part of the Anglican movement worldwide and allied to the Church of England, were debating the appointment of a practicing homosexual to a senior position. The following comment was made live on television:

“The Bible has to be interpreted in the light of contemporary society – not in an arcane way” (that is, a primitive or outdated way).

In other words, as society becomes more and more liberal and permissive and controlled by the media and those with vested interests, God’s Word has to be altered and manipulated to fit in with the world’s ways. This would, in reality, be moulding and shaping God into the form that we wanted or suited us – and that is preposterous.   It would mean that those who are “influencers,” to use a modern word, could come up with all sorts of ideas and then God’s Way would have to be interpreted in the light of their musings and pronouncements!!  What utter nonsense that is!

In short, today, many can use the arguments that as culture changes, God will go along with the flow and bend according to the particular dictates of man at any given time. They don’t phrase it that way of course, but that is how they view it.

How ridiculous that would be, but it is the way of some – but, hopefully, not those of us in the Church of God!  If that were the case, we could justify ANYTHING – anything at all.    God does not change – and His Word doesn’t change.   That’s the way of the world.  

Hebrews 13:8 says: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever.”  Does Jesus Christ “move” with the times and go along with the musings of men?  

In Malachi 3:6, we read the following: “For I am the LORD, I do not change;”  

Barnes Notes on the Bible read:

“I am the Lord, I change not – better, more concisely, ‘I, the Lord I change not.’  The proper name of God, ‘He who Is,’ involves His unchangeableness. For change implies imperfection; it changes to that which is either more perfect or less perfect: to somewhat which that being, who changes, is not or has not. But God has everything in Himself perfectly.”

We read in the Pulpit Commentary:

“For I am the Lord, I change not; or, Jehovah, I change not. This is to show that God performs his promises, and effectually disposes of the allegation in Malachi 2:17, that he put no difference between the evil and the good. The great principles of right and wrong never alter; they are as everlasting as he who gave them. (our emphasis). God here speaks of himself by his covenant name, which expresses his eternal independent being, ‘the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning’ (James 1:17). ‘Therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed’. Because God’s eternal purpose stands good, and his ‘gifts and calling are without repentance’ (Romans 11:29), therefore the Israelites are indeed chastised and corrected, but not wholly consumed; they have a place and a nation, and the great promises made to their forefathers will all be fulfilled in due time (Jeremiah 30:11; Micah 7:20).”

If God does not change, neither will His Word.  2 Timothy 3:16 is further evidence of the permanency, constancy and dependability on the Word of God whichever century or millennium it applies to: “All Scripture (not just that which is convenient – but ALL Scripture) is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”

And there is yet another passage of Scripture that those who want to bend God’s Word into their own interpretation and ignore its clear instructions, would find very hard to defend. John 17:17 quotes Christ’s words: “Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.”

Our approach is exactly the opposite to that of the world – we DO believe God.   Sanctify means to set apart – and true Christians are set apart by the Truth – and God’s Word is Truth. Why can’t others see this?   We know that at the right time, God will remove their spiritual blindness.  But we have been called now – and we know the Truth.  And as we take the approach of the Bereans by searching the Scriptures, we will ensure that we find out what God’s Will is and subjugate our own human reasoning to His perfect Will and Way. That is the approach that God expects of His children.

Some time ago, one letter in a newspaper said:

“The Church of England should go the whole hog and just sling the Bible in the bin.   It could then preach its ‘anything goes’ philosophy to its largely empty churches.   The rest of us will have moved on to a Christian church.”

The Daily Caller wrote on August 30, 2023: “The Church of England’s (CofE) liberal drift continues as a new survey shows that a majorities of priests now support abandoning traditional Christian sexual ethics.

“A survey by the Times found that 62.6 percent of priests believe the church should relax its teaching that all premarital sex is sinful. A smaller majority (53.4 percent) voiced their support for same-sex marriage. The Church of England currently allows marriages only between men and women, though the General Synod — the CofE’s legislative body — voted in February to offer blessings to civilly married same-sex couples.”

While this was talking about the Church of England, it could certainly be extended to cover many more in mainstream Christianity.   There is no leadership in the most important area of all – that of Bible understanding. Judges 21:25 tells us, and this was applicable thousands of years ago and is certainly applicable today:

^“In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”

This is a repeat of what is stated in Judges 17:6. The fact that this concerned royalty does not deflect from the principle.   For “king,” we can substitute “leader” – and the fact that there is no clear, unambiguous and moral leadership in the Church of England, and in so many other churches allowing women in the ministry, and many other things, which are not approved or sanctioned by Scripture—means that everyone is doing what is right in his own eyes.  

(To be continued)

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

It is a good question because there have been those, in the past, who have not been too bothered about their reputation outside the Church, as long as they had a good report within the Church of God.   It is a topic worth reviewing.

First of all, let us look at “having a good report” within the Church of God.  If we can’t measure up to this requirement, then we shouldn’t be a Church member, and having a good report from those outside the Church becomes irrelevant.

In respect of the ministry, we read in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 about the qualifications of the ministry. Verse 2 says: “A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach.”   Verses 3-6 continue along the same lines, and in verse 7, we read: “Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.”   Many other translations reflect this same need to have a good testimony or report from those who are not Church members.

This clearly shows that a minister in the Church of God must have a good report both inside and outside the Church, and he is to speak the Truth and shepherd the flock.  There are many other Scriptures that give the same advice and instruction; for example, see Acts 20:28; Ephesians 4:11-16; Philippians 4:9; 2 Timothy 2:14-26; Titus 1:7-9; Titus 2:7; 1 Peter 5:2-3 (and there are many more).

Ministers have to set the example in the Church of God but such an example is not the preserve of just ministers.   Likewise, members have to live up to high expectations as required by God of His people.

In a piece by one Christian author, entitled, “An Example for Others to Imitate,” he wrote that “being a godly example is not an option, it is commanded in Scripture. We have no choice in being an example of some kind and having an impact on those around us, but we do have a choice in the kind of witness and impact we provide. Someone is going to follow us and be influenced by us. We need Christian maturity that provides people with real honest-to-God examples of authentic Christ-like living and that mature Christians and leaders have a responsibility to maintain a consistent example.”

Let us review just a few Scriptures about members inside the Church.

Matthew 5:13-16 reads: “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned?  It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men. You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.”

God is not calling the whole world now. He is only working with a small group of people at this time to get a specific job done, that of preaching the gospel of the coming Kingdom of God in all the world as a witness to all nations (see Matthew 24:14).   In other words, Christians are rare.   True Christians are basically sprinkled across the earth like you would sprinkle salt across food – sparingly.   But what a difference they make in the world!   One thing we can learn from Christ’s metaphor of salt is that our calling and commission are unique, important and highly valuable.   It is indeed a rare opportunity to be called by God in this age.

We can see that salt is pure. It spices and flavours, it creates thirst, and it preserves, and all the analogies are applicable to a Christian’s life.   

In 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, we read about Paul serving all men: ”For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. Now this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I may be partaker of it with you.”

Unfortunately, some take this to mean that a true Christian must be accommodating about all things, which is obviously in error.  One commentator wrote that “We do not lower our standards but we waive our privileges.”  When rightly understood, this is about setting the very best example to encourage and help those who may be interested in the true message of the Bible and showing that we are not hypocrites but live by every word of God (see Matthew 4:4).

1 Thessalonians 1:2-4 shows us that we are to be about our Father’s Work: ^“We give thanks to God always for you all, making mention of you in our prayers, remembering without ceasing your work of faith, labor of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ in the sight of our God and Father, knowing, beloved brethren, your election by God.”

We have been chosen by God.  1 Peter 2:9-10 states: “But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.”

Further, we are to follow Christ’s example, as we read in 1 Peter 2:22-23: ““Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth’; who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously…”

Acts 16:2 reads: “He (Timothy) was well spoken of by the brethren who were at Lystra and Iconium.”

We must always be cognisant of the fact that our attitude and approach can affect hundreds, maybe even thousands of people during our lifetime.

A review of some Scriptures about having a good report outside the Church will show us how important this is.

Proverbs 22:1 states: “A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, Loving favor rather than silver and gold,” and Ecclesiastes 7:1: reads: “A good name is better than precious ointment…”

One writer observed: “There are people you have never seen or met—yet just their name gives you an opinion of them. For example, when you hear the name George Washington, you think of a man who sacrificed greatly to help form the United States of America; but when you hear the name Adolph Hitler, a very different picture comes to mind.”   A good name usually refers to the reputation of that person.

Romans 12:17 states: “Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men.”   Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers observes: “Let your purposes be such that all men shall recognise their complete integrity. Do not engage in enterprises of a doubtful character, that might bring not only yourselves but the Christian body into ill repute.”

Romans 15:1-3 reads: “We then who are strong ought to bear with the scruples of the weak, and not to please ourselves.  Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, leading to edification. For even Christ did not please Himself; but as it is written, ‘The reproaches of those who reproached You fell on Me.’”

This is about helping others and not being self-serving which is a trait and a trap that most in this world can fall into.

1 Corinthians 10:32 exhorts: “Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God”.  Ellicott’s Commentary put this succinctly: “A practical test of whether any course of conduct is to the glory of God. If it cause[s] any human being to offend then it is not to God’s glory.”

1 Thessalonians 1:6-8 points out: “And you became followers of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit, so that you became examples to all in Macedonia and Achaia who believe. For from you the word of the Lord has sounded forth, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place. Your faith toward God has gone out, so that we do not need to say anything.”   Put another way, their actions were worth a thousand words, and in spite of “much affliction,” this did not deter them from setting the right example.

As mentioned previously, 1 Timothy 3:7 stated: “Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.”   This couldn’t be clearer, and while this is speaking about a minister, the same principles would certainly apply to a Church member who falls into reproach, that is, into disapproval, criticism or disappointment, which, inevitably, will damage the reputation of both the Church and that individual.

Titus 2:6-8 reads: “Likewise, exhort the young men to be sober-minded,in all things showing yourself to be a pattern of good works; in doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility, sound speech that cannot be condemned, that one who is an opponent may be ashamed, having nothing evil to say of you.”

How could any opponent of the Truth of God have anything wrong to say about a Christian who would exhibit such an example, unless they twisted what was said and done in a distorted and dishonest way – and that would be to their shame, should they do so.

1 Peter 2:12 reads: “…having your conduct honorable among the Gentiles, that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by your good works which they observe, glorify God in the day of visitation.”  This shows that true Christians will be “spoken evil of” by those who have little or no knowledge of the Way of God but they will realise, at some time in the future whenever God chooses, that the example of beliefs of such Christians was the Truth all along.   This shows that our example and current life-style is so important, not only at the present time but also at some time in the future for those who may mock and scorn us now.

As Benjamin Franklin once observed: “A good example is the best sermon.”

There is no doubt that there will be times, probably many times, when true Christians have to go against the prevailing ethos or culture in our respective countries and stand out as being different for the sake of our beliefs.   As time goes on, this will surely accelerate as society plunges into new depths of anti-godly behaviour, and we will be out of sync with most people.   That should not worry us; surely, the worry would be if we were in tune with what is going on.

Mr Herbert Armstrong told the story of those who managed a particular Feast site and who remarked that Church members were great but “oh that crazy religion”—never realising that it was their religion, their Christian faith, which made them the decent individuals that they dealt with.   At that time, such members set a very good example of God’s Way of Life.

We should be concerned about the way we are perceived by others, as we don’t live in a vacuum.  In short, we should always endeavour to set the very best possible example that we can, both in the Church and outside in society, but realise that many times we will have to set our face against the prevailing ways of man which will set us apart, and if that means that we will “be spoken of as evil” (see Romans 14:16), then that is the price we have to pay.  

We are to have a good report from those outside the Church, but without compromising or accommodating the world in any way.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)