Before we look at the Bible’s straightforward answers to this subject, let us first of all look at the current state of affairs in society today. There is no doubt that there are those who espouse a very liberal approach, perhaps none more so than those who are involved with the gender agenda which includes many sexual variations and perversions.

In an article in the Brighton Argus newspaper (UK) on 28th January 2016, Brighton school children were asked to choose from a list of terms to describe their gender.  The selection list included: “Agender,” “All genders,” “Androgynous,” “Bi-gender,” “Boy,” “Demi-boy,” “Demi-girl,” “Female,” “Gender fluid,” “Gender nonconforming,” “Genderqueer,” “Girl,” “In the middle of boy and girl,” “Intersex,” “Male,” “Non-binary,” “Not sure,” “Others (please state),” “Rather not say,” “Tomboy,” “Trans-boy,” “Trans-girl,” Tri-gender,” “Young man” and “Young woman.”

On the 20^th April 2016, the Daily Mail reported that “the proposed national survey was linked from the website of the Children’s Commissioner for England, Anne Longfield, and was forwarded to some schools by local councils. It later emerged that the survey had been withdrawn. Anyway it was only a draft.”

You can be assured that in the current climate of “diversity and anything goes,” this will appear again at some time in the future as the liberal agenda increases its momentum as we plunge headlong through a moral crisis that will only be solved by the return of Jesus Christ.

Christian Institute Deputy Director Simon Calvert maintains that “there are simply two sexes — not 20-plus genders — and that the survey only incited confusion and jesting. [Giving children so many options will spur answers] across the spectrum — not least from kids who want to make fun of the whole thing,” Calvert contends. “But for some children, it will be profoundly confusing to find out that there are adults who don’t seem to know that boys are boys and girls are girls. The British Christian leader insists that the distinctions given in the Bible about human sexuality are those given by God to safeguard them from falling into all types of deviant attitudes, behaviors, and lifestyles.”

In our Update 686 on May 1^st 2015 we published the following:

“America’s Descent into the Abyss of Sexual Perversion.

“CNN wrote on April 23:

“It’s only April, but 2015 may be remembered as the year the term ‘transgender’ fully entered mainstream consciousness.  In January, President Obama condemned the persecution of ‘people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender,’ becoming the first president to utter the word in a State of the Union address…

“Transgender is an umbrella term for people whose gender identity — their internal, personal sense of being a man or a woman — differs from what’s typically associated with their sex at birth. Some transgender people alter their bodies through hormones and or surgery, although many don’t…”

In another article on the same subject, we commented that “the very concept of ‘transgender’ is an abomination in the eyes of God.”

In our Update 751 on September 2^nd 2016, we quoted a Newsmax report under the headline, “Transgender Bathroom ‘Rights’ Upheld by Bush-Appointed Judge,” part of which stated:

“Bathroom access has become a flashpoint in the legal and cultural battle over transgender rights in the United States.  An estimated 0.6 percent of U.S. adults identify as transgender…”

In his StandingWatch programme of 16^th September 2016 entitled “America’s Persecution of Churches”, Mr Norbert Link repeated this percentage of 0.6 percent people – but look at the pressure from such a small group!

An updated article, written in the Wall Street Journal on May 13, 2016, entitled “Transgender Surgery Isn’t the Solution – A drastic physical change doesn’t address underlying psycho-social troubles,” Dr Paul McHugh, former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, USA, examined the matter and here are a few excerpts from that article:

“….policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention. This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken—it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.

“For the transgendered, this argument holds that one’s feeling of ‘gender’ is a conscious, subjective sense that, being in one’s mind, cannot be questioned by others. The individual often seeks not just society’s tolerance of this ‘personal truth’ but affirmation of it. Here rests the support for ‘transgender equality,’ the demands for government payment for medical and surgical treatments, and for access to all sex-based public roles and privileges.

“You won’t hear it from those championing transgender equality, but controlled and follow-up studies reveal fundamental problems with this movement. When children who reported transgender feelings were tracked without medical or surgical treatment at both Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic, 70%-80% of them spontaneously lost those feelings. Some 25% did have persisting feelings; what differentiates those individuals remains to be discerned.

“At the heart of the problem is confusion over the nature of the transgendered. ‘Sex change’ is biologically impossible. People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women. Claiming that this is [a] civil-rights matter and encouraging surgical intervention is in reality to collaborate with and promote a mental disorder.”

You can read the article in its entirety at http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solution-1402615120

In short, Dr McHugh opined that the transgender issue was a mental disorder.   It seems that, like many other sexual orientations, it may have become a fashionable thing to do.   We must never underestimate the power of peer pressure.

The Bible is very clear on this matter.   In Genesis 1:27-28, we read the following:

^“So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.  Then God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.’”

God created male and female – two genders with no other variation – and told them to be fruitful and multiply.   That cannot happen with a number of the wrong sexual practices that exist today.   In Genesis 5:2 we read confirmation of the instruction in Genesis 1:27-28: “He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created.”

Jesus Christ also confirmed this God-ordained order as we read in Matthew 19:4-6: “And He answered and said to them, ‘Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning “made them male and female,” and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”?   So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.’”

One commentator online wrote: “My gender is part of my created identity; it is God’s plan for my life. It is not fluid or changeable. It is fixed. Just as a dog cannot be changed into a cat or a fish into a bird, a man cannot be changed into a woman, or vice versa, because gender is a fundamental aspect of creation.”

In Deuteronomy 22:5 we read: “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the Lord your God.” An abomination is a thing that causes disgust or loathing.  Synonyms are: atrocity, disgrace, horror, obscenity, outrage, curse, torment, evil, crime, monstrosity, violation. God does not mince His words.

God talks about His wrath on unrighteousness in Romans 1:24-32: “Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.   For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;  being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.”

There is a lot in this passage but it can be very briefly summarised by saying that those who practice any of these sins are deserving of death along with those who approve of such practices.   We have been warned!

In 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 is further admonition for those who have ears to hear: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.”

Sexual sins are clearly mentioned here and those involved with transgender issues had better be careful as we have seen from this and other passages. There is only one way of proper sexual conduct, and that is between a man and a woman who are married to each other, and God allows no other variation.

What we always have to remember is that Satan is the author of confusion, but 1 Corinthians 14:33 states: “For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints.” Having to select from 20 plus definitions to define gender is confusion especially for the young mind, but God has made the whole process simple by creating man and woman with no other acceptable variations.

As we race towards the end of this age, Satan will become more and more accusatory and dangerous as we read in Revelation 12:9-12: “So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, ‘Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down.  And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death. Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time.’”

It is a sad fact that today the biblical approach is one that is scorned and disregarded, which is very dangerous to do. We should have love and concern for those who are engaged in these practices, loving the sinner but hating the sin. God instructs us in His way which is always for our own good and we ignore it at our peril.   Transgender practices, along with many other sexual sins, are not to be part of any true Christian’s life.   Such practices will not be allowed in the Kingdom of God and that should be enough proof for anyone with an open mind and a willing heart.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

If we search the Scriptures, we will find that depending on the circumstances, God endorses both being married and being single.   Let us look briefly at what He has to say about each state.

In Genesis 2:18 we read: “And the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.’”   In verses 21-24 we further read: “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.  And Adam said: ‘This is now bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.’”

And so, in the second chapter of the Bible, we see that marriage was instituted between a man and a woman.  There is no other combination approved by God’s Word in spite of modern-day secular legislation.

In Unger’s Bible Dictionary under the heading “Marriage” – Origin (page 817), we read the following:  “Marriage is a divine institution designed to form a permanent union between man and woman that they might be helpful to one another (Genesis 2:18).   Moses presents it as the deepest corporeal and spiritual unity of man and woman, and monogamy as the form of marriage ordained by God (Genesis 2:24; cf Matthew 19:5).   Without the marital tie, the inhabitants of this world would have been a mixed multitude.   The family circle, family instruction, and parental love and care would have been altogether unknown.”

There are many instructions to “go forth and multiply,” and this was within the institution of marriage (see for example Genesis 9:1 to Noah and his sons after the flood; 9:7; 35:11; 47:27, etc).   Population was needed after the flood, and the nation Israel would be raised up through whom the Saviour, Jesus Christ, would be born from the tribe of Judah (see Genesis 49:10).

We should also note the references to Christ and the Church.   In Ephesians 5:22-33, instruction is given to both husbands and wives, and in verse 32 we read: “This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.”   Revelation 19:7 sheds more light on this relationship: “Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife (the church) has made herself ready.”

In our booklet “Is That in the Bible? – The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation!,” a number of comments are made about this relationship, as follows:

“As we can see from Ephesians 5:31–32, Paul is addressing here the mystery of the relationship between Christ and His Church.  He emphasizes that those who are called must come out of the ways of this world in order to be joined with Christ.  Christ must be continuously living within them (1 John 2:15–17; Romans 12:2; Galatians 2:20). Paul also shows that the physical institution of marriage is pointing at a spiritual union between God and man. It is pointing at a spiritual marriage between Christ and His Church” (page 115)…

“Jesus spoke of Himself as the ‘bridegroom’ (Luke 5:34–35).When Jesus was on this earth, He taught that He would be taken away and that no ‘marriage’ would be consummated at that time.

“Note, as well, that Jesus gave a parable indicating that He, as the bridegroom, would return (compare Matthew 25:1–13). In this story, Jesus began His teaching with these very important words: ‘The kingdom of heaven shall be LIKENED to ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom’ (Matthew 25:1).

“Jesus presented this example of bridegroom and virgins (that is, the bride) as a means of instructing His Church to be ready for His return. Most importantly, the Church was to remain vigilant and not let God’s Holy Spirit (the “oil” for their lamps) fade out of their lives! He would only marry those who were ready.

“John the Baptist also referred to Jesus as the bridegroom (compare John 3:29). In his statement, John attested to the fact that Jesus was the Christ, and that he (John) was in a position of service, as if he were the friend in a marriage ceremony. This is, of course, just an analogy, because John will be in the first resurrection and therefore part of the bride.

“In a deeply symbolic series of statements, Paul instructs married members of the Church to love their mates (compare Ephesians 5:22–33). He draws on the selfless example of Christ’s love for His Church to make his point. Then, he mentions a profound truth about marriage, calling it ‘a great mystery’ (verse 32).

“Why is it a mystery? Because it is a truth hidden in the plan of God—hidden to those not called by God! Yet, God’s Church understands this mystery: Jesus Christ will marry His Church (compare, especially, verses 25–27)! Note what Paul also stated in this regard: ‘For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ’ (2 Corinthians 11:2)” (pages 119-120)…

“The fact remains that Jesus Christ will marry His Church!  We find this specifically promised in Revelation 19. Verse 7 states: ‘Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.’ Understand that the wife spoken of here is comprised of ALL of the saints—ALL of those counted WORTHY for the first resurrection. Christians who live just before Christ’s return, also must be prepared—just as the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25 so clearly teaches.

“Carefully consider what is stated in Revelation 19:8: ‘And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is THE RIGHTEOUS ACTS of the saints.’ The focus for who will be in this wedding ceremony centers on those who are righteous—that is, those who obey God! Here we gain insight to the fact that Christ will marry those who live righteous lives—something only possible through having the help of God’s Holy Spirit!” (page 121)…

“Speaking to Israel of a future time—a time when God will establish His Kingdom on the earth: ‘“And it shall be, IN THAT DAY,’ Says the LORD, “That you will call Me ‘My Husband…’”’ (Hosea 2:16). Then, in verses 19–20, we find that God promises to join Israel to Himself in an unending marriage: ‘I WILL BETROTH YOU TO ME FOREVER; Yes, I will betroth you to Me In righteousness and justice, In lovingkindness and mercy; I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness, And you shall know the LORD.’ It is important to realize that God will ‘betroth’ Israel in the future—AFTER Christ’s return and the FIRST resurrection. This shows that the ‘bride’ cannot only include those in the first resurrection” (pages 121/122).

Does this mean that marriage is the only acceptable state to God?   Does God’s command from ancient times “to go forth and multiply” still apply today for every human being?   Is every Christian obligated to follow through on this ancient instruction?   Many men and women today may prefer to stay single for all sorts of reasons. While many of those reasons might be based on selfishness and improper motives, Paul addresses some valid concerns starting in 1 Corinthians 7:25.   This was written at a time of persecution of the church, but the principles still apply today.  In verse 32, Paul writes: “He who is unmarried cares for the things that belong to the Lord – how he may please the Lord.”

We read that Christ, when He was here on earth, was not married; and neither was John the Baptist. On the other hand, most of the apostles were married. As a Rabbi taught under Gamaliel, Paul (then known as Saul) seemed to have been married before his conversion, but some feel that his wife died. In any event, he was unmarried in his later life (1 Corinthians 7:8). He did not have the extra responsibilities, problems and stresses that can come with marriage and a family.   He was able to devote his life to doing the Work of God. Had he been married, perhaps he might not have been so prolific in his writings and in his work of preaching the gospel?  This does not mean that the apostles Peter and James—just to give a couple of examples—were in any way less productive because they were married. We read that Peter’s wife accompanied him on his travels and was undoubtedly a great help to him. However, Paul judged that in his case, it was better for him not to get married, while also emphasizing that it is not a sin to marry.

Jesus explained that some will not marry for several valid reasons, one of which is for the Kingdom of God’s sake (Matthew 19:10-12). As one observer remarked: “It is not a sin to remain single, even for your entire life. The most important thing in life is, not finding a mate and having children, but serving God.”

Of course, it would be physically impossible for everyone to be married anyway.   Quoting from the “United Nations Statistics Division (in 2010)”, they state the following: “In today’s world, there are 57 million more men than women. This surplus of men is concentrated in the youngest age groups and steadily diminishes until it disappears at about age 50, thereafter becoming a surplus of women owing to their longer life expectancy. A surplus of men characterizes the world’s most populous countries – China and India – hence the large surplus of men worldwide.   In most other countries, there are more women than men.”

The original question is, “Married or single – which is the ideal state?”   And the answer is simple.   It is that state which is best for the individual with neither necessarily better than the other.   They both offer opportunities for the people of God Who wants all of His people to be happy, service-orientated and fulfilled, whether they are married or single.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

Lot is recorded as having two daughters who had not known a man (Genesis 19:8), but Genesis 19:12 talks about his sons-in-law. How is this explained?

We know that “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).   Therefore, there must be an answer to this question and there are three possible answers.

First of all, let us look at this passage. In Genesis 19:8 Lot, through a misguided sense of hospitality, offered his two daughters to the depraved men of Sodom. The new KJV Bible Commentary observes that this “is absolutely an amazing statement, especially on the part of a believer.   That he would protect two strangers and offer his own flesh and blood is beyond understanding. Doing his best, he has jeopardized his daughters, enraged his townsmen, and finally required rescue by those he was trying to protect.”   Matthew Henry’s Commentary states that Lot “pleaded the laws of hospitality and the protection of his house which his guests were entitled to.” Of course, we understand that his conduct, at face value, would have been terribly wrong. However, it has been suggested that Lot’s “offer” was not to be meant seriously, but only made for the purpose of showing the Sodomites the depravity of their conduct.

In addition, Richard Elliott Friedman, “Commentary on the Torah,” writes on pages 66-67: “It seems to me that it is not the Near Eastern tradition of hospitality but of bargaining that accounts for what is going on here… Lot is supposed to make an extraordinary gesture. He offers his own two daughters. But no one is supposed to take him up on it. And then, in this horrible town, the gesture does not work anyway. The people only become angry.”

In Genesis 19:14 we read that “Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who had married his daughters, and said, ‘Get up, get out of this place; for the Lord will destroy this city!’ But to his sons-in-law he seemed to be joking.”

In Genesis 19:15-17 we read the outcome. “When the morning dawned, the angels urged Lot to hurry, saying, ‘Arise, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be consumed in the punishment of the city.’ And while he lingered, the men took hold of his hand, his wife’s hand, and the hands of his two daughters, the Lord being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city. So it came to pass, when they had brought them outside, that he said, ‘Escape for your life! Do not look behind you nor stay anywhere in the plain. Escape to the mountains, lest you be destroyed.’”

The first possible answer to our above-stated question is that Lot had more than two daughters.   In verse 15, Lot was told to take “your two daughters who are here”. In the Douay Rheims Bible it states, “Arise, take thy wife, and the two daughters which thou hast who are here.” And in Young’s Literal Translation we read: “Rise, take thy wife, and thy two daughters who are found present.”   If these daughters were with Lot and his wife, it is likely that they were unmarried; otherwise, they would have been with their husbands (the exception behind this is explained below in the second possible answer).   If indeed Lot had other daughters who were not in the house, they would have been destroyed with his sons-in-law as only Lot, his wife and two daughters escaped from Sodom.

Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers agrees with this concept, stating: “The traditional view is that given in our Version, and is confirmed by Genesis 19:15, where the words—‘thy two daughters which are here,’ Heb., which are found—certainly suggest the idea that Lot had other daughters, besides the two which escaped with him.”

A second possible answer is the way that in biblical times, betrothal was a valid marriage.   In the Jewish Encyclopaedia.com under the heading “Betrothal and Home-Taking” it states the following: “After the betrothal a period of twelve months was allowed to pass before the marriage was completed by the formal home-taking (‘nissu’in,’ ‘liḳḳuḥin’). In case the bride was a widow or the groom a widower, this interval was reduced to thirty days (Ket. v. 2; Shulḥan ‘Aruk, Eben ha-‘Ezer, 56).”

In our booklet “Jesus Christ – A Great Mystery!,” pages 24 and 25, under the heading “Mary’s Betrothal to Joseph,” the following is written:

“We should take note of another important fact when considering the relationship of Joseph and Mary prior to Mary’s conception. We read in Matthew 1:18–20: ‘Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly. But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.”’

“The angel told Joseph that he and Mary were already considered to be husband and wife. But they had not consummated the marriage yet—they were living in the state of betrothal. Legally speaking, they were married, but they had not come together, sexually, as husband and wife.

“The concept of betrothal is quite different from today’s concept of engagement. In our society the word ‘engagement’ does not seem to carry much value, as people commonly get engaged and then dissolve the engagement without legal consequence. In ancient Israel and Judah, a betrothal was considered to be a binding agreement, and could only be dissolved through divorce. This is why Joseph wanted to ‘put her away,’ a Biblical expression for divorce.

“The Luther Bible comments on ‘betrothal’: ‘The Jewish engagement constitutes a legally binding marital promise. The marital intercourse only occurs, however, after the wedding, when the bridegroom takes the bride into his home.’

“Eerdman’s Handbook to the Bible states, ‘Betrothal, unlike modern engagement, was legally binding and could be broken only by divorce.’”

In addition, Flavious Josephus, the Jewish historian, states in 1:11:4, that “these sons in law to Lot, as they are called (Genesis 19:12-14) might be so styled because they were betrothed to Lot’s daughters, though not yet married to them.” Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible gives a similar explanation: “… some think they were espoused to men, but had not yet cohabited with them.” Similar the viewpoint of Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges: “‘… married his daughters.’ Better, as R.V. marg., were to marry… This seems more probable… The verb used here means literally ‘the takers of.’ For Lot’s daughters were in the house with him: Lot went out to find his ‘sons in law’: the word ‘sons in law’ may mean ‘the betrothed.’ If the daughters had been married, they would not have been living with Lot.”

Therefore, it could well have been that Lot’s daughters were betrothed as was Mary to Joseph who were considered man and wife.

And a third possible answer, although unlikely, is that Lot lied when he said that his daughters were virgins, to make them more “attractive” to the evil and sexually perverted people of Sodom.   If this is indeed the answer, then Lot would not have been the only man of God to lie (as examples, see Abraham in Genesis 20:2; Isaac in Genesis 26:7 and Jacob in Genesis 27:19).

Looking at the evidence, it is more likely that either the first or the second explanation may be the correct answer. But whichever it is, we can rest assured that the Bible does not contradict itself (compare John 10:35).

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

Since you believe that Mr Herbert W Armstrong had the ministerial rank of “apostle,” what is your response to those who believe that there is to be no further understanding or change after he died on January 16th 1986?

Our original Q&A on this subject, as quoted in the first part of this series, covered 1 Corinthians 11 v 1: “Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.”   In some other translations “imitate” is translated as “follow” and so the words follow and imitate seem to be interchangeable – but are they?   Dictionary definitions are as follows:

Follow: go after as an admirer; strive after; aim at

Imitate: mimic; try and get as close to the real thing as possible; impersonators

“Mimetes” is the Greek word translated imitate (see Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries).   So we need to know – and be sure – what Scripture says and imitate any leader only according to revealed Scriptural instruction and not to add on any unnecessary, unwanted, unwarranted or personal opinions or baggage.

The Christian life, as revealed in the Bible, is one of overcoming and growing spiritually toward the goal of being spiritually mature like Christ.   God expects us, as Spirit-begotten Christians to be developing more and more of the very character of Christ as we learn to follow His Way of Life.

Imitate is to get as close to the original as possible, not just following which is a much looser term.   It indicates being skin-tight.   To follow is a much looser term and whilst it can be correct in many ways, the word imitate is much more all-encompassing.   Imitate is to do everything Christ did and wants us to do according to His perfect example.   So this is not striving after words but making sure that we fully understand the difference and take to heart the original meaning of “mimetes” which is to imitate.   And that is much more important than just following and so we can only follow those who faithfully and loyally preach and teach the way of God as revealed in His Word and as we have seen, some of the original apostles’ writings have been incorporated in the Word of God which cannot contradict itself.    Any apostles since then have not been unique as were the original ones and, therefore, we must not follow them as if their writings were holy writ.

One such proponent of “nothing can be changed after 16th January 1986” states the following:  “We see in chapter 4 (1 Corinthians 4:14-16) above, that Paul clearly instructed the Corinthian Church to follow him – as he was their apostle, sent to them by Christ. However, many people try to use another passage, also found within First Corinthians, to justify a position of not following the apostle sent to them and through whom they were enlightened. The passage is: “Be ye followers of me, even as I also [am] of Christ” (I Cor 11:1). Such people claim that this verse implies only following someone in so far as they follow Christ, and rejecting any aspect or teaching that does not comply.”

It would appear that this is written to emphasise the need to follow Mr Herbert Armstrong at this end-time.   However, we read in 1 Corinthians 3:1-4 a section of Scripture that implies exactly the opposite.   It states: “And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ.  I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able; for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men?  For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not carnal?”   We can read from this passage that partiality was not to be countenanced and yet it appears that, as written above “that Paul clearly instructed the Corinthian Church to follow him – as he was their apostle” which would negate the instruction on non-partiality.   There appears to be somewhat of a contradiction here.

It is also worth noting that Mr Armstrong said just before his death that the church membership should follow the Pastor General of the Worldwide Church of God after his death.   Mr Joseph W Tkach was appointed and, along with Mr Tkach’s son and some others, led the Church in a completely different direction.   That organisation, now called Grace Community International, is part of mainstream Christianity with just about every teaching understood during Mr Armstrong’s tenure of office being changed.   Mr Armstrong undoubtedly said this in good faith, but had his instruction been followed the true Church of God would have been destroyed.   However, Jesus said that He would guide His Church, be with it always, and that the grave would never prevail against it (Matt. 16:18; 28:20).   To have followed this instruction would have been an unmitigated disaster, but as this would have been Mr Armstrong’s instruction at his death, it could not have been changed according to those who feel that everything that was in place on 16^th  January 1986 would have to have complied with that instruction to their great detriment.   Just this one issue shows what a disaster it would have been to adopt such a faulty instruction and reasoning even though it was given in good faith.

God will use His ministry as He sees fit and if there is greater understanding of a particular doctrine, then we should embrace that.   Being stuck in a time warp (whatever date that may be) can only stunt personal growth which we are charged to pursue.

Ephesians 4:11-15 is quite clear in delineating the offices that God has in His Church and how those so ordained have the responsibility to speak only the truth:

“And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ…”

Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers opines on 2 Peter 3:18 as follows:  “The Apostle ends, as he began, by exhorting them to that sound knowledge which he sets forth as the sure basis of all Christian activity, whether the knowledge be full and mature, as in 2 Peter 1:2-3; 2 Peter 1:8; 2 Peter 2:20 or to be acquired and increased, as in 2 Peter 1:5…” (which is about fruitful growth in the faith”).

Some claim that nothing can be changed after the death of an apostle, and since Mr Armstrong was an apostle, nothing can be changed after his death in 1986.

Even though we need to realize that the Bible speaks about more apostles than just the original twelve apostles who followed Christ during His lifetime, we also need to observe important distinctions.

An apostle is someone who is being sent out to proclaim the gospel. In Matthew 10:1-5, the names of the original twelve apostles are given. Compare also Luke 6:12-16. The list includes Judas Iscariot who was later disqualified and replaced by Matthias–one of two candidates who had accompanied the other apostles “all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us” (Acts 1:21-26).

The Bible mentions additional apostles after the New Testament Church was founded–including Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:4 with Acts 13:50) and James, the half-brother of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:5-9).

As we stated before, we read that the Church was founded on the apostles and prophets, with Christ being the chief corner stone. But the apostles, mentioned therein, are foremost the original twelve apostles (with Matthias having replaced Judas), because we read that the Heavenly Jerusalem has “twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” The apostle Paul was later chosen to become the apostle to the uncircumcision, as Peter was the apostle to the circumcision. And he was used powerfully by God to write inspired and sacred texts which were included in the Bible, and which were recognised by Peter as inspired and holy writings.  But ultimately, it was one of the original apostles, John, who canonised the Bible, after the death of Paul and Peter, as we explain in our free booklet, “The Authority of the Bible.” 

We read in Acts 12:1-2 that one of the original twelve apostles, James, the brother of John, was killed by Herod. But later, in Acts 15 (AFTER the death of one of the original apostles), important changes were made in the Church, holding that physical circumcision was no longer necessary.  The discussion followed teachings by Paul and Peter regarding the need for circumcision, and it was James, the half-brother of Christ and the apostle over the Church in Jerusalem, who pronounced the final decision. The idea that no changes can be made in the Church after the death of an apostle (James, the brother of John) is therefore clearly wrong.

Some claim that Herbert W Armstrong was the end-time Elijah who restored all things and since everything was restored, nothing can be changed. This erroneous concept has been thoroughly disproved in our Q&A on “The Mission of the End-Time Elijah.” 

Some claim that Mr Armstrong’s book “Mystery of the Ages” deserves the status of an inspired writing equal to the Bible. This false claim has been disputed by Mr Armstrong himself who stated, when he passed out copies of his book to Ambassador College students, that his book was written to help with understanding the Bible better, but that it was in no way to be viewed as holy Scripture.

With this latest information and all of the previous material mentioned earlier in this Q&A (and all of the others), we feel that these cover this subject comprehensively and answers the views held, no doubt sincerely, by those who may feel otherwise.

Lead Writers: Brian Gale (United Kingdom) and Norbert Link