The Inerrancy of the Bible, No. 5


We’re continuing our study of the doctrine of inerrancy related to the current scene and the current issues that face society which are very often issues that are related to something that the Bible has spoken about, and the question of how authoritative the Bible is when it speaks, and how important it is to consult the Bible on these issues. This is a matter of increasing concern. Since we began this series, several of you have shared the fact that people have been in touch with you in one way or another. They’ve been in touch with our tape ministry, for example, on the very questions that we’re dealing with—the issues of biblical authority and the confusion that is in their minds because they are sitting under preachers in ministries where they’re being told that the bible has mistakes in it. So, the question of biblical inerrancy, that is, the Bible in its original writings without error and in practical effect transferred down to us through copies without any basic errors in them—that that’s the kind of a Greek and Hebrew Bible we possess. Is that really the case? It’s very important that we know that that is the case or that that is not the case. People don’t understand, and very often Christians do not understand, what’s taking place in the theological world. The do not understand that these questions that they are sensing about what their preachers are saying about a Bible with mistakes in it is the cornerstone, is the key issue, of theological discussion today, and for very good reason.

Some of you may have watched the television program that one of the major networks put on yesterday on homosexuality. It was the kind of a program you had to literally gut out to stay through from start to finish, but it was a very informative program. It was a program that was based upon the fact that in the city of San Francisco in northern California, 20% of the city is made up of homosexuals. The program revolved around the campaign of the current female mayor of San Francisco, Diane Feinstein, and her … efforts to win the votes of the homosexuals and to win their support. The homosexuals have discovered that they are such a powerful group in the city of San Francisco that they literally swing elections now. No politician can now ignore them, and no politician can ignore their demands.

It was interesting to see this mayoral candidate Ms. Feinstein stand up before a homosexual gathering and apologize to them for a remark that she had made which was published in Woman’s Home Journal to the effect that she said that homosexuals must take into consideration the community standards in making their demands upon society. That is a very simple statement. It’s not an exaggerated statement, but the homosexuals rose up in indignation because they understood that community standards condemn the practice of homosexuality. They do not view it with respect. They view it as a perversion, and the homosexuals are demanding that all of that be changed and that publicly they be recognized not as perverts; be recognized not as some off-breed type of human being; but, be recognized as perfectly normally and as those who have a lifestyle that is perfectly acceptable. And here was the picture of a candidate for mayor standing up and apologizing to them for making that remark to the effect that they must consider community standards as they make their demands upon society. Well, with that apology, she secured their swing vote and she was elected and is now mayor of San Francisco.

The documentary showed that the homosexuals of San Francisco have facilities throughout the city where homosexuality is openly conducted—where the perversion may be indulged. They have S&M parlors—Sadists & Masochists parlors—where that particular expression of homosexual perversion is practiced. It’s very interesting to look upon the implements that are used in that sort of thing. It came as somewhat of a shock to realize that medical facilities are provided by some of these S&M parlors so that the physical brutality which is imposed upon people and that is the result of that practice must now receive medical attention on the spot, and sometimes the results do indeed lead to death. The coroner of San Francisco has said that 10% of the deaths that are coming through the coroner’s office are deaths that have upon them the evidence of the consequence of the sexual perversion of S&M parlors.

Yet, the city can do and does nothing about it. And San Francisco is a very delightful and refreshing city. It is a lovely place and right in the center of it is a park. This park has been taken over by homosexuals for public sex. It was interesting to watch the camera roam that park and to see that men all hours of the day and night were streaming in and out, cruising to find somebody with which to practice the perversion to which they have committed themselves. Again, there is no reaction by civil authorities to outlaw or to do anything about it. People are living near the park—homes of families with children. They were speaking to the interviewer about the problems of having their children just on the proximity of the park, looking across and seeing what is done in public display, and public sex being performed by homosexuals, and the city does nothing about it. The city cannot do anything about it because of the power of the vote.

The Sodom and Gomorrah-like atmosphere, of disregard for community moral standards is everywhere, and it was very clearly portrayed by this documentary. They are determined to flaunt their evil. This is of course what Paul pointed out when he discussed homosexuality in the book of Romans. This is what the Scriptures pointed out, that these people not only commit themselves to this evil, but they seek to promote it, and they seek to bring others into the practice of this evil.

In order to do this, the city of San Francisco is now pursuing a program in the public schools called demystification of homosexuality where they are going to demystify for school children the practice of homosexuality so that the school children of San Francisco will grow up not thinking there is something bad about being a homosexual or a lesbian. That’s the public school system of San Francisco.

A Kinsey report recent conducted on the city of San Francisco indicated that these homosexuals in the city have a history of running into literally hundreds of partners with whom they practice this perversion, and in many cases, up to a matter of 1,000 different individuals. The part that you had to really gut out most included the scenes that they showed of men in social activities—in bars and in sophisticated cocktail party gatherings where you saw men caressing one another like a man would caress a woman. And you saw them engaging in kissing activities as men and women who are in love would engage in as lovers. You saw this man-to-man on the scene.

The whole scene, however, was dignified as conduct of professional people. It was dignified as the conduct of wealthy people. It was dignified as the conduct of the influential people of the city of San Francisco. As you looked at them, you could tell that that’s exactly what they were. They were the wealthy. They were the influential. They were the decision makers. They were the policy movers. But there was, interestingly enough, ever where you looked there was that stamp and that characteristic of perversion. I tried to back off and say, “Am I just imagining that or do I really sense and see that on these people? Is there a cast of the eyes? Is there an inflection of the voice? And I think there is. I just could not get away from the fact that, one by one, it wasn’t just because I knew these people were that, but because they actually were that, and they were reflecting that.

Now there was one question that was missing in this whole documentary. There was one critical question that was never brought up even in the interviews with these people: How does this practice related to the Bible? What does the Bible have to say about it? That question was never once proposed to the men who were interviewed or to the leaders of homosexuality in San Francisco that were speaking for the group. This question was never brought up.

One question was posed, and that was, “What is the consequence of this lifestyle?” This question was directed to the leaders. There was a panel of very sophisticated men sitting there explaining their lifestyle and the political power now that put Feinstein in the mayor’s office—the political clout of 20% of the city of San Francisco. The question was finally put to them, “What is the consequence of this lifestyle?” There was just a pause. The camera came up close on one man’s face and you saw him thinking. There was silence, silence, silence, interminable silence. Finally, he said, “I don’t know.” Then there was another pause, and he said, “I don’t think I can answer that question. I don’t know if there is an answer to that question.” Then almost as if he realized what he was saying, he quickly, “But it doesn’t mean degeneracy, if that’s what you mean.” But it was interesting that when the question was put to him, he couldn’t really say, “Here are the consequences as society says that’s acceptable as a lifestyle, and you may practice it.”

But the question was never put throughout that program, “Does it bother you that the Bible which purportedly speaks for God, who purportedly made all of us, who purportedly governs this universe, has condemned the very practice that you’re engaged in and which you are demanding political recognition for.” That thing was noticeably left out. There was no authoritative basis brought in by which one could decide whether society should condemn this practice, whether it should restrain it, or what it should do about it. There was no authoritative basis whatsoever. All that was brought in was what I want to do, what you want to do, what I think, and what you think, and it was very clear as some of these feminists particularly stood up in this mass rally and spoke on the microphone and told them that, “we are powerful, we are strong, and we are going to change society. The constant effect was that there’s nothing wrong with us. The problem is society. That’s what’s wrong. We don’t need to be changed. We’re normal. It’s society that needs to be changed. Society and its attitudes are what is abnormal.”

The question of biblical revelation was never once discussed. Yet, lest you should forget, the Bible is not silent on this subject. And if the Bible is not silent on this subject, then the Bible should be brought into the picture. It was a great error to leave the Bible out of that documentary. The only reason the Bible was left out of that documentary and out of the direct discussion with the homosexuals is because of the issue that we have been discussing—the rejection of the inerrancy of the Bible. Once you have rejected a Bible that has no mistakes in it, then you have rejected all authority. You’ve undermined all authority in anything that the Bible has to say, and you have rejected all bases of authority for human conduct. Then it’s just what society is willing to accept or not accept. There is no voice from God who speaks to us. God is silent on this subject. He has spoken and he has spoken very definitively through the Scriptures on it.


Now you’ve heard that. The Bible has spoken on this subject. When a documentary purporting to present all the views and all the factors that are at issue here on a major television network ignores the Bible, then it is a very defective presentation.

Leviticus 18:22

Here’ what the Bible says about this subject: In Leviticus 18:22, the people of God are being given their basic moral principles. These principles are being given in order to preserve the human race during the era of the angelic domination of society. This has been given to them now that they have come out of Egyptian slavery. These principles were given to them in order to preserve their freedom. God brought them out of Egypt for freedom. God gives them the groundwork upon which they will now be preserved in freedom during the era of satanic domination of this world scene until Jesus Christ returns to set up His millennial kingdom. Therefore, to preserve freedom, in Leviticus 18:22, God says to the people of Israel, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind. It is abomination.” Verse 29 says, “For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the soul that commit them shall be cut off from among their people.” And that expression, “shall be cut off from among their people” means that they will come under the wrath and the judgment and the condemnation of God.

Leviticus 20:13

Leviticus 20:13 says, “If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.” The condemnation was placed one step higher. God says that homosexuality is a capital crime. It’s in the same category as murder in the first degree—murder one. The penalty for that is death. In that case, there is blood guilt involved in the death that is imposed upon the individual, but the blood guilt is upon the person himself. The blood guilt is not upon the state that executes or upon the man who pulls the handle that drops the lethal pellet into the hydrochloric acid, or the man that pulls the handle that sets the electric current into the chair that brings about the execution. That’s the point of this last phrase, “They shall surely be put to death and their blood shall be upon them.”

Now if you take another person’s life in first degree willful murder, then that blood is upon you, but in this case the blood is upon the individual, in the case of homosexuality, and there is no guilt on the part of those who execute. Under the theocratic system of the Old Testament Jewish system, people who practiced this were put to death. They didn’t have too much trouble with homosexuality in the nation of Israel. I’ll guarantee that. The solution was simple, quick, and effective. They had a marvelous educational program against homosexuality, and everybody learned the lesson.

Leviticus 18:24-28

Leviticus 18 presents another very important point about this particular sexual perversion. Leviticus 18:24 say, “Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things, for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you. And the land is defiled. Therefore, I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.” Notice the effect upon the nation itself. “Ye must therefore keep my statutes and my ordinances and shall not commit any of these abominations…” And He has just mentioned homosexuality here in the context. “… nor any stranger who sojourneth among you. For all these abominations have the men of the land done…” That is, the pagans who were in this land that they have taken over. “… who were before you, and the land is defiled. That the land spew not you out also when ye defile it as it spewed out the nations that were before you.”

What is God saying? God is telling Israel, “The reason I have wiped out the Canaanitic civilization, that I’ve given you military victory over them, you have destroyed them under my directions, is because they have practiced these perversions, among which was homosexuality and lesbianism. Because they practiced this perversion, I have destroyed them nationally.” And then God says, “Take a lesson. What I have done to the heathen, I will do to you my chosen people if you practice this same perversion, and if you permit it to be practiced in your society, I will destroy you as a nation, and I will take you out of the land. As the land spewed them out in a picture of disgust and revulsion of the earth itself over this practice, so the earth, the land of Palestine will vomit you out of its confines just as it did the pagans for the same practice.”

That’s interesting. A nation’s preservation depends upon obedience to these basic moral principles designed for freedom. A nation that tolerates homosexuality has his historically gone down to destruction. You can trace the pages of history from one end to another, from biblical history to secular history, and, when a nation has tolerated homosexuality, when it has become a widespread practice, it has brought destruction down upon itself. It would not be surprising to see the city of San Francisco experience another horrendous earthquake with all the consequences of the 1906 earthquake, and one can hardly refrain from getting the image of Sodom and Gomorrah again receiving the judgment of God.

Genesis 18:20-21

In Genesis 18 we have that record of Sodom for us. This was a city, the metropolitan center of Sodom and Gomorrah, a metroplex area, that was steeped in homosexuality on a far greater scale than San Francisco is today. Genesis 18:20-21: “And the Lord said, ‘Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very great (and their sin was homosexuality and lesbianism), I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it which has come unto me, and if not I will know.’” God says, “I am going to send my angelic messengers, I’m going to send my agents, and they are going to have an on-site exploration, and they’re going to confirm what has come to Me.” And this is of course God in His omniscience who knows very well what’s going on. But God is going through these legal procedures so that the case is fully established against Sodom and Gomorrah, that this perversion is what they have been guilty of, the judgment that He is about to execute, they fully do indeed deserve.

Genesis 19:1-28 – Sodom and Gomorrah

Well, let’s look at it. Genesis 19:1—here is the historical account: “And there came two angels to Sodom that evening…” Now they looked like ordinary men, but they were angel beings. “… and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom.” You remember that Lot elected when he separated from his uncle Abraham to go to the city where all the action was. “… and Lot sat at the gate of Sodom, and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground. And he said, ‘Behold now my lords, turn in I pray you into your servant’s house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early and go on your way.’ And they say, ‘Nay, but we will abide in the street all night.’”

Lot is extending oriental hospitality to these two visitors who have come by. They said, “No, we’ll find someplace here in the city to stay overnight. Verse 3 says, “And he pressed upon them greatly, and they turned unto him and entered into his house. And he made them a feast and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat. But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter.”

Now notice who is involved in this gathering around the house. The word has gone out that Lot has two beautiful men who have come, and they are visitors in his house. Old men and young men from every quarter of the city of Sodom start gathering. I thought of this scene as I watched that documentary last night and saw those mobs of thousands of homosexuals marching in the streets of San Francisco.

“And they called unto Lot and said unto him, ‘Where are the men who came into thee this night? Bring them out unto us that we may know them.’” Now this is a King James old English expression, “know them,” that is identical in meaning to what the Scriptures mean when it says, “and Adam knew his wife Eve, and she conceived.” This is a Hebrew way of referring to sexual intimacy. So what they are saying is, “Come out. Bring these men out so that we may practice sex with them, and they may practice upon us.”

“And Lot went out the door unto them and shut the door after him. And he said, ‘I pray you brethren, do not so wickedly.’” Now Lot knew enough doctrine to know that what they were asking was a terrible sin. He knew enough from his teachings with Abraham that this was evil and that this was dangerous evil. But of course Lot was stupid from the word go, and that’s why he committed himself to live in the city of Sodom to begin with, with all that it did to his daughters, and I won’t get into that this morning, let alone the rest of his family. His wife was so negative to his authority that she didn’t even make it out of this city when the condemnation came because she couldn’t obey her husband not to look back. God said that once they were gone they were not to turn back. Anybody who looks back, that would be the last thing they would see on the face of the earth. In the case of Lot’s wife, indeed it was. She turned into the pillar of salt. That was the end of that, and they went on without her.

“So, I pray you brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold thou…” This shows you Lot’s degeneracy as he picked up the surroundings. It’s really amusing to think that San Francisco is going to permit public school children to have the myth removed about homosexuality from these children and it’s not going to affect the children—that they can have homosexual teachers and it’s not going to affect the children, because it very definitely affected Lot. Look what he’s willing to do with his own daughters: “Behold now I have two daughters who have not known man. Let me I pray you bring them out unto you, and ye do to them as is good in eyes. Only unto these men do nothing. For therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.” He says, “I have to virgin daughters and you can have fun with them tonight, but don’t disturb my guests.”

But I must recognize that Lot may have been running a calculated risk there. He may have known the community so well, knowing that they were so perverted, (so) uniformly homosexuals that they wouldn’t be interested in his daughters, and that this might at least dissuade them.

“And they said, ‘Stand back.’ And they said again, ‘This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge. Now will we deal worse with thee than with them.’ And they pressed hard against the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.” They said, “Here’s Lot. He’s an outsider and he comes to our city. Now he’s standing up here and acting as a judge and saying, ‘No, this is a very wicked thing which you are asking me to do with these men—this practice that you are asking me to bring these men out for you to do. That is an evil.’” And they’re saying, “Who is this jerk telling us that we can’t have an alternate lifestyle? Who is this guy who’s going to impose his standards?”

If you watched the documentary last night, you saw that man stand up and say, “We are going to make our own standards.” He said it several times. “We are going to make our own standards. Our society will not judge, will not determine, our practices for us.” Well, when you have power, when you have the power of numbers, and thus in this country political power, you can indeed lay down your own rules. And they had this in Sodom, and that’s what they said. “Who is this judge? Who is this Lot to act as judge of what is right and wrong over our lifestyle.” And they said to him, “We’ll to you worse than we would have done to those men that you won’t bring out.” That’s exactly what homosexuals of San Francisco said to Mayor Feinstein. They made it very clear to her as well as to the man who was her opponent running for the office. They made it very clear what they would do if their demands were not met—what they would do to her politically, and what they would do to him politically.

Verse 10: “But the men put forth their hand and pulled Lot into their house to them and shut the door.” That is, the angelic beings pulled Lot from the door and they slammed the door shut. “Then they (the angels) smote the men (the men on the outside—the homosexuals) that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great, so that they wearied themselves to find the door. The men (the angelic beings) said unto Lot, ‘Hast thou here any besides? Thy son-in-law and thy son and they daughters and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place. For we will destroy this place because the cry of them has become great before the face of the Lord, and the Lord hath sent us to destroy it.’”

So, here the picture was made clear. The land itself was crying out in revulsion against the practice. The angels had gone through the legal procedure. God had confirmed the case against Sodom, and now the decision was made to destroy this metropolitan center. And it was a great metropolitan center—a center of great civilization.

Verse 24: “Then the Lord reigned upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah (the adjoining city) brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven. And He overthrew those cities and all the plain and all the inhabitants of the cities…” There were about three other cities on that plain as well, all practicing the same thing. “… and that which grew upon the ground. And his wife (Lot’s wife) looked back from behind him and she became a pillar of salt. And Abraham got up early in the morning to the place where he stood before the Lord, and he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah and toward all the land of the plain, and beheld, and lo the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace.”

Abraham had pled for God not to do this. Finally, God got down to agreeing to where if Abraham could find ten righteous people in this city, ten non-homosexuals in effect, that He wouldn’t destroy it. And Abraham couldn’t find ten, so he stopped interceding with God, and the judgment was executed.

Subsequently in Scripture, Sodom is referred to as a symbol, as the epitome, of evil (Isaiah 1:10, Ezekiel 16:46, Zephaniah 2:9, Matthew 11:23, Revelation 11:8). All of these passages of Scripture use Sodom and Gomorrah as a frame of reference of God’s treatment of evil, as a stark example that God is a god of wrath as well as a god of love, and that he will judge evil without mercy, and this evil of homosexuality particularly.

Romans 1:24-32 – Homosexuality

The Bible is not silent on this subject. When we get to the New Testament, the apostle Paul in the very opening chapter of the book of Romans places before us the fact that it is this perversion which in part was the cause of the breakdown of human society, and the gradual descent from a knowledge of God into a bestial lifestyle that even worshipped animals. In Romans 1:24, Paul says, “Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts (their minds, that is) to dishonor their bodies between themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason, God gave them up unto vile affections. For even their women did exchange the natural use for that which is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lusts one toward another (one man toward another man), men with men, working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was fitting.” That recompense of their error, or their rebellion, which was fitting. That statement indicates that God has a divine self-destructing system that is built into sexual perversion.

Verse 32: “Who knowing the judgment of God that they who commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.” They’re not satisfied with just doing it. They have pleasure in seeing others do it and in promoting the practice among others.

Now, this whole attitude that was so aptly portrayed by that documentary last night is the direct result of rejecting the Bible’s claim to inerrancy. That’s where it starts. If the Bible is not inerrant, then the Bible is not a book that speaks with absolute authority, and if it does not speak with absolute authority, then we don’t have any basis for condemning that particular perversion. Indeed, when you look at certain denominational groups, such as the Methodist church for one example, that has rejected the inerrancy of Scripture, you also have the scene, you also have the attitude as there is in that church that homosexuals should be permitted to be in the ministry and to hold pulpits in that church. That is the direct result of the fact that there is no basis for condemning them because we can’t say that the bible condemns homosexuality. We can only say that the Bible is a record that at one time people condemned it, and that in the experience of mankind, they thought that God condemned it, and that the Bible, since it is not the Word of God, does not necessarily mean that that which is recorded in the Scriptures must be applied today.

The Historical Critical Method

But as we have pointed out to you, all of this began with the historical critical method of a man named Johann Semler in Germany who came up with the conclusion because he was negative toward the Word of God that the Bible and the Word of God are not one and the same thing—that the Bible only contains the Word of God. The consequence of viewing the Bible as a book written without supernatural controls was eventually concluding that the Bible was written by men in their time by their natural processes—just a historical event of people sitting down and writing portions of Scripture. They divided these up into various documents, in the case of the books of Moses called the JEPD documents according to what name of God that was used. These were supposedly woven together by later authors, and the books were attributed to Moses.

But there was no supernatural control. There was no God governing these passages that we just read to you. This was just what people were reporting about what they believed. Consequently, there are no miracles, there are no prophecies, and there is no divine authority. Now, this contradicts the views of Jesus Christ himself, on the Mosaic authorship for example; and, that Isaiah wrote the whole book of Isaiah. It faces people with the fact that there is no agreement between the so-called higher critical scholars as to what part of the Bible is the Word of God. So, now the people in the pews who have attended these liberal churches are terribly confused because they hear different stories from different preachers as to what part they must believe and what part they must obey and what part they do not have to obey. All of these conclusions which were reached by the higher critical approach, the historical criticism approach, was to the destruction of the Scriptures themselves.

This is a fiasco. It has come up with passing fancies rather than assured results because every scholar changes what he thinks is the Word of God. They have been claiming to return to the theological message of the Scriptures, but without a Bible which is inerrant, you can’t establish any theology. Without a Bible whose very words are inspired by God, you have no basis of establishing the content of Scripture.

So, you cannot subscribe to higher criticism and at the same time subscribe to what the Bible teaches. That is the very important point we’re trying to make. Any time a preacher or a church or a denominational group accepts the fact that the Bible has errors in it, it accepts the errancy concept, that group is on a greased slide from which it cannot return. It will inevitably doom itself. You cannot subscribe to what the Bible teaches and subscribe to the historical critical approach at the same time. The Bible itself then is rejected as a permanent divine statement of revelation which you must believe.

Historically, conservative Christianity has always held to an inerrant Scripture. That is the problem that we face today because among conservative Bible teachers this is changing. The liberal rejects the Bible as being a collection of theological statements and a record of true historical events, and that’s the point. The liberal does not believe that the Bible is a book filled with propositions of doctrinal statements of truth which we must obey. He is against that concept of propositions of truth.

Liberalism says that God is not still speaking to us through the Bible today. The Bible is only a record of how He once spoke to people, but what He once said to people he no longer tells us. This is why Bishop Pike of the Episcopalian church, when he got into demonism in speaking with the dead—consulting through the demonic world, through the spirit world as he called it, to try to talk to his son when he committed suicide. When he was warned that the Old Testament Scriptures made this a capital crime among the people of Israel, his response was that that was for a former age. That was for the people who lived then. That is the record of how God dealt with them. That is the record of what was expected of that society, but that does not apply to us today.

That makes nonsense unless you understand that Bishop Pike believed in the historical critical view of Scripture, that the Bible is a book that any of you could have written this afternoon—today. It is just a book that records your spiritual experiences and your spiritual ideas, and somebody with a little ability with language weaves it all together, puts it in a smooth form, and comes up with a book that is completed. But, that is only what you feel about God—only what your experience has been that is recorded. So, while the Bible is a record of a past revelation to a sinful race, it is not a revelation today. But the Word of God in Hebrews 1:1 says that that is a revelation. God has spoken to us through prophets in the past. He has made a final declaration through his Son, and that applies to us as well today.

Hebrews 4:12

Hebrews 4:12 for that reason says, “The Bible is alive and powerful.” The liberal has nothing to offer in the way of authority, so that when you come up against a concept such as homosexuality, there is nothing you can do about it. You’re doomed. The whole system was based upon the fact that there is no authority that must be imposed beyond what society wants to do. If there is no inerrant Bible, there is no authority to condemn that practice. Yet the Word of God is very clear. Because of the rejection of the inerrancy of Scripture, you can have a documentary such as that that was shown last night, and there is not reference to the Bible whatsoever. There is not coming to biblical authority in this matter for one single moment because that is not considered an issue.

So, inerrancy is very very serious. Tonight we’re going to tie this up and see where we are on the current scene and where we go from here. I hope that the result of this will be that you understand this issue (and be prepared) when you run into this among your friends who believe that the Bible is not absolutely true in all that it has recorded, (or when) you are faced with associating with a religious group. If for some reason God moves you from this geographic location and you have to find a church, one of the first things you should find out is whether that pastor believes in the inerrancy of Scriptures. If he hedges on the matter, then wash your hands of them. The first thing you should find out is whether that church believes in the inerrancy of Scripture. If they do not, turn your back on them and reject them because it will be destructive to you forever. It will be destructive to your children. It will be a great loss to you personally because that church, that individual, or that source of influence is in a degenerate condition already.

The answer to homosexuality is that it is a great evil because the Bible says it is a sin. The Bible never calls something a sin over which you do not have volition. That means that homosexuality is not something you’re born with. It is something that you choose to do. It is something indeed that your experience may have trained you in the wrong direction.

Suppose that you were born like Oliver, into a circumstance that throws you in with thieves, and you have a Fagin for a father who steals, and he trains you to be a thief. Stealing is a sin that you choose to do, but indeed you may have been reared and trained to be a thief from your childhood. But it is still sin even though it’s a very natural thing for you to steal. You’ve been trained in a family of liars. Your parents always lie. If your mother is going to go shopping at the A&P, and you say, “Are you going to go shopping at the A&P?” she says, “No, I’m going to Kroger.” This is just because she is a liar all the time. It’s just natural to lie, always telling you something other than what she’s going to do. So, you grow up with that, but it’s still sin. It’s an evil you’ve been trained in, but it is evil. Now that’s the same situation as homosexuality.

We received a letter from one of our Pioneer Girls explaining their program of bringing boys into a girl’s program and going into a boy’s program. They had this man as an example. He works with the Pioneer Girls in his church. In this letter he said that this is so wonderful because he’s a guide now in the Pioneer Girl’s program. And the thing that was so wonderful to him was that all the other guides just accepted him. He just felt like one of the girls.

But in any case, if there’s anything that does contribute to homosexuality, it’s the blurring of the distinctive male and female roles. That is at the heart of why a kid grows up to this sexual perversion. He grows up without a strong male image and a strong female image in his home. The male role and the female role have been blurred in his experience, and all he grows up with is a gray area, and that is the major thing that leads to that perversion. What is Pioneer Girls doing? I couldn’t help thinking what kind of brains possesses those women that they would even publish that letter with anybody who had a discernment and read what that man said, being accepted by the rest of the guides and he felt so wonderful about it. What are the boys under his influence going to have but a blurred image: “Let’s see, is this Mr. … or is this Mrs. …? I can’t tell which he is.” They are contributing to the very evil that is destroying our society today in the form of the perversion of homosexuality. This is all because we don’t think that the Bible speaks with authority that we must obey because we think there are errors in it, and therefore we can question what does not please us.

Dr. John E. Danish, 1980

Back to the Basic Bible Doctrine index

Back to the Bible Questions index