Raping Sacred Scripture
The Violation of Galatians 3:28
By Dr. H Rondel Rumburg, Chaplain-in-Chief of the Sons of Confederate Veterans
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."
People cannot attack God directly, although many have rejected His revelation of Himself and His will. Sadly, some, under the guise of believing the Bible, have fabricated many false interpretations; and they have forced these interpretations upon certain texts of Scripture in order to attempt to conform the meanings to acceptable social and political ideals. Therefore, God’s virgin daughter, who is Divine Revelation, has been regularly raped. The forcing of this pure maiden has occurred in order to satisfy the sensual appetites of such people as Abolitionists and Jacobin idealists as well as many others. The Abolitionist Dr. Albert Barnes (1798-1870), who was a pastor, theologian and commentator said, “Show me that the Bible sanctions slavery and the Bible is no Bible to me” (p.164, J. B. Shearer’s Hebrew Institutions, Social and Civil). Obviously he set himself up as the judge and jury of the Bible. This is what happens when social ideas are given more relevance than God’s pure Word. The basis of Barnes’ judgment was his own reason. The goddess of reason was enthroned by the French Revolution as is well known. There was a lack of moral virtues in this goddess. This goddess of reason was created to strike at the personal holy God who rules in His universe according to a strict moral code; but man wanted to enthrone human reason in God’s place. Atheism is the sworn confederate of Abolitionists and Jacobins, and it seeks to dethrone God, enthrone reason as the universal standard of truth, and endorse force as the official agent to accomplish its end.
Dr. R.L. Dabney asked the pertinent question, “Will you surrender the inspiration of the Scriptures to these assaults of a social science so-called?” Many have raped the pure Word of Life and imposed a false hermeneutic or false principle of interpretation upon it because they do not believe God’s Word and try to force it to say something it does not say in order to make it more presentable. And why do some think the Bible needs to be made more presentable? The one who usually tries to make the Bible more acceptable is the one who does not believe in God or His revealed will. If a faithful Biblical hermeneutic is not used then the Bible can be made to say anything, such as, “Judas went and hanged himself. Go thou and do likewise. And what thou doest do quickly.”
THE IMPORTANCE OF INTERPRETATION
How should fallible men approach the interpretation of the infallible and sacred Bible? God’s Word must be interpreted within the reality of its unity, by the leadership and guidance of God the Holy Spirit who preserved its integrity, with an understanding that God is its author, and with the realization that it is a book dealing with the history of redemption.
First, the Bible must be interpreted in the context in which it was given, and by the language in which it was originally written. God had a definite purpose in giving His word through men chosen to receive it and record it. He chose the original languages in which His word was written. God also preserved that same word in order to keep it inviolate. If the penman were speaking narratively, metaphorically, symbolically, poetically, etc., then the passage should be interpreted in that light. The aim of honest exegesis is to discover the meaning that the Holy Spirit had in conveying the Scripture. Since the very words of Scripture were given by inspiration of God, the verbal context is of primary importance in understanding what the Lord is saying. The Word of God does not bow to man, but man is to bow to it. The context not only involves the verbal but any historical or geographical information given in the text. Some are guilty of misusing the historical context in order to mask their sociological, multicultural or pluralistic ideas. This is because they wish to emphasize and endorse their own man-centered agenda. They would like to rip the controls out of God’s hand and do it their way (Psalm 2).
Second, the Bible must be interpreted on the principle that Scripture cannot contradict Scripture, but that Scripture interprets Scripture. Scripture must interpret Scripture by “comparing spiritual things with spiritual” (1 Cor. 2:13). The supposed contradictions of Scripture are between the ears of fallible readers. “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:20-21). God the Holy Spirit inspired and preserved the Bible. Since Scripture cannot contradict Scripture then it must explain Scripture. This rule of interpretation has a number of identifying phrases. The phrase may be known as the analogy of faith or the analogy of Scripture. When approaching sacred Scripture it is good to remember, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect (complete), thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
THE ABUSE OF THE TEXT
One of the most raped texts of Scripture in the Bible today is, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). This verse has been forced for years by abolitionists, feminists, sensualists and others. The verse has been used to endorse the abandonment of race distinctions, it has been used to endorse race mixing, and it has been used to foster a world without nations based on a faulty understanding of the phrase “there is neither Jew nor Greek.” Another misuse of the verse has been to condemn slavery in the South and in the Bible because of the words, “there is neither bond (slave) nor free.” The sacred text has been used to encourage unisex, sodomy, and other perverted sexual habits since the text says, “there is neither male nor female.” For example, the verse was quoted as an endorsement encouraging the acceptance of homosexuals in an Atlanta church. One writer said the meaning of this verse “does away with all human distinctions.” Later the writer said, “all human barriers are broken down.” Another writer said, “All class distinctions disappear in the new fraternal life in Christ.” One feminist gave the following distortion of the text, “There is no distinction between heterosexual and homosexual, cleric and lay, white and multicultural.” These various corruptions of the truth belie unsound thinking and an unregenerate heart. This is equalitarianism (or the often-used French form, egalitarianism), which is a leveling movement that does not have anything to do with justice and is not Biblical. It is the product of humanism and involves the worship of man. The Bible is really the opposite of equalitarianism, for it teaches us to treat our own families, our own fellow believers and other men differently. For instance, love does not mean equality; a man is not to love his neighbor’s wife as his own wife. Dr. R.J. Rushdoony in Law and Society clearly noted, “Scripture gives no justification for an equalitarian order, and it also gives no ground whatsoever for an elitist order. Only a godly order established in terms of ... Scripture.” And then he remarked, “Both equalitarianism and elitism are in essence contemptuous of man in the name of man. The elitist despises the majority of men, and the equalitarian despises all able and independent men, but, in essence, both despise all men as men and love rather their idea of men, not man himself in singular.” If all class distinctions disappear, does this mean that we should allow the mentally challenged equal access to operating rooms so they can perform brain surgery? Does this mean that pedophiles should have equal access to our children? Does this mean that heterosexuals are no different than homosexuals? Does this mean that there is no place for the husband to be the head of the home? Does this mean that you cannot be a partisan to your race, your family, your wife or husband, your church, your Bible, your Scriptural convictions, your state, or your friends?
THE MEANING OF THE TEXT
What does this text (Galatians 3:28) say and what does it mean? First, the general context of the book of Galatians is important. Some Judaizers had slipped into the local churches spreading their false teachings of law-works salvation. Paul wrote the epistle to the Galatians out of astonishment. He was amazed that these churches in the area of the Galatian territory had quickly deserted Christ’s grace for another gospel [which Paul said perverted the gospel of Christ] (1:6-9). The apostle emphasized that “the gospel which was preached of me is not after man” (1:11). He did not receive the gospel he preached from men, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ (1:12). Paul then gave a personal history to verify how he came to receive the gospel which he preached (1:13-2:21). He strongly emphasized “the faith of Jesus Christ” whereby men are justified (2:16-19). This justification was not on the basis of “the works of the law.” Paul’s gospel came by “the revelation of Jesus Christ.” Consider his own description by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain” (2:20-21). Paul again returned to the Galatians and said they were foolish and bewitched, but he had some very provoking questions to ask them (3:1-5). Then he pointed out that those following the Judaizers were under the curse (3:10). “But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, the just shall live by faith” (3:11). The truth is Christ redeemed those who are justified by faith from the curse of the law by His crucifixion (3:13). Why did Christ redeem and become a curse for us? “That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith” (3:14). Then Paul dealt with the law and the covenant (3:15-25). “The Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe” (3:22). It is the promise, which comes by the faith of Jesus Christ, that is given to those who believe. He speaks of how it was before faith came and then after faith came (3:23-25). “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” (3:26). Believers are the sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus and nothing else. Then he deals with baptism which denotes a public confession of faith in Christ for it is an outward sign of an inward change (3:27).
Second, what has been the emphasis of the epistle to the Galatians up to our text (Galatians 3:28)? He has been habitually dealing with the gospel which involves the faith of Jesus Christ or justification by faith. Paul had declared that there was no saving value in the law, for the law was not given to save, but he was expounding upon the sufficiency of Christ for salvation. The salvation of the soul is the point clearly set forth. What is Paul’s conclusion? The thrust of his argument is that racial distinction, social position and sexual differences do not secure the promises of God, but union with Christ does secure the promises of God. The point is that regardless of or in spite of race, slavery, freedom, or one’s sex, only those who are in Christ are saved, and they are heirs according to the promise (3:29). But in the present world these distinctions remain and are not done away.
Third, the meaning of Galatians 3:28 is now considered in a more expanded exposition. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (3:28). Literally translated it is, “There is not Jew nor Greek; there is not bondslave nor freeman; there is not male and female; for all you are one in Christ Jesus.” Please note the words “There is neither” or “there cannot be” or “there cannot exist” these distinctions in Christ. These words are used as a statement of fact. In the saving relationship with Christ the distinction between “Jew” and “Greek” cannot exist. “Jew” does not mean just men of the tribe of Judah but all circumcised persons of all tribes of Israel (Rom. 2:28). “Greek” would include all those whom the Judaizers would consider pagan. The Judaizers had carried their national agenda into the realm of salvation (or the spiritual realm), but Paul was answering that such a condition does not exist in salvation, for union with Christ makes one an heir according to promise in the spiritual realm whatever his earthly lineage. Racial or national distinctions are a matter for the physical realm now and racial distinctions among the redeemed are a matter recognized in the eternal earthly realm that is future (Rev. 21:24). However, in the realm of salvation it is salvation by grace through faith for all those who are in Christ. Paul’s reminder at the end of the epistle was, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature” (Galatians 6:15). A new creature or creation in Christ Jesus is a regenerate person. Being a Jew did not give an advantage in the matter of salvation over a Gentile.
Also, in the redeemed relationship with Christ there cannot exist the social distinctions of “bond nor free” or “bondslave or freeman.” This was a social distinction between many believers in the New Testament time, but it was not a distinction maintained in justification by faith. Paul’s contention with the Judaizers (who had tried to force obedience to the law as a condition of salvation) was here contrasted with the union in Christ that conquered all things and established either slaves or freemen who are justified by faith. The slaves or freemen who were trusting in Christ for salvation from sin were not different in the inner man of the spiritual realm, although there was a great deal of difference in the outer man in the civil realm.
The last distinction, which Paul addressed, was that there does not exist “male” and “female.” Salvation was not a matter of the male and female sex. Just as being a slave or freeman makes no difference in whether a person is saved, even so being a male or being a female does not give one an edge in salvation. One sex was not more savable than the other, for salvation was not dependent on sex but depended on the purpose of God in Christ. The work of grace was not a matter of male and female rivalry. Paul’s opposition to the Judaizers was evident also at the point of the different sexes. The Judaizers and heathen religions made a great difference in the sexes. Women there were placed more in a realm somewhere between men and beasts. However, in Christ no difference was/is made between the two in saving grace.
It has been asserted that Paul in this verse combated the public prayer that some men in the ranks of Judaism used. The prayer said, “Blessed be the Lord our God, the King of the world, that He hath made me an Israelite; blessed be the Lord, who hath not made me a ‘Gentile’; blessed be the Lord, who hath not made me a ‘servant’; blessed be the Lord, who hath not made me a woman.”’ However, there is no way from the context to verify this assertion.
Paul’s concluding statement was of great importance in understanding the verse, “for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” This was an emphatic statement referring to the unity in Christ Jesus and how He saves. The first three clauses become clear in their meaning when they are seen in the light of this statement. The Jew, Gentile, slave, freeman, male and female are all alike in their spiritual standing in the Redeemer. Therefore in respect to nationalities some are Jews and some Gentiles, and in respect to conditions some are slaves and some are free, and in respect to subjection some are men and some women, but in the saving relationship that is in Christ Jesus all are as one. This verse is in harmony with Paul’s other writings.
THE RESULT OF MISINTERPRETATION
What does a false interpretation of this verse do to the Bible? If Galatians 3:28 is interpreted as a theory of egalitarianism, feminism, multiculturalism, pluralism, miscegenationism, socialism, abolitionism or Jacobinism then the text will be raped and its virgin meaning removed. Modern abusers of Scripture come in many varieties. Some have distorted this verse to make it conform to their racial, social and sexual views. These believe in the nullification of racial distinctions, the leveling of the social rank and the removal of sexual differences not only in the spiritual realm but also especially in the physical realm. Peter well described them with a warning, “they that are unlearned and unstable wrest [or put to the rack], as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness” (2 Peter 3:16-17). Galatians 3:28 is perhaps the most abused text in modern times. Klyne R. Snodgrass in an article asserted, “This text, like some others, has become a hermeneutical skeleton key by which we may go through any door we choose. More often than not, Galatians 3:28 has become a piece of plastic that people have molded to their preconceived ideas” (p. 161, Women, Authority and the Bible). Modern religious writings on this text prove that declaration to be accurate. One modern textual twister said that it was “the apostle Paul’s sexual liberation.” What happens when Galatians 3:28 is misused as an egalitarian sword to cut down all differences? It is a long way from no difference in salvation in the spiritual realm to destroying all differences in race, authority or sex in the physical world. The result of such an interpretation would be anarchy. To force the interpretation of complete equality on this verse in such a general sense is catastrophic. Nowhere does the verse declare everyone in the physical realm equal in Christ, but it does say all the saved are one in Christ.
What does a faulty interpretation of the words, “there is neither Jew nor Greek” do to the racial teachings of the Bible? Ultimately an erroneous interpretation of this part of the text would charge God with racism and His word with error. How would it charge God with racism? It was God who divided men into races, languages and nations (Genesis chapters 9 to 11). If we force the text and make it say that redemption was needed to remove these distinctions, we are saying that God was wrong in making them originally, which is a direct attack on God’s Godhood. This heretical interpretation charges the infinitely holy and infinitely wise God with sin. The result of such a position is that God is not God. The rape of this text also condemns the veracity of sacred Scripture. Not only does the Bible identify the beginning of races, languages and nations prior to Christ’s redemption, but it also reveals that these distinctions are maintained after redemption. There are many texts which evidence this truth (some examples are Revelation 7:9; 5:9; 11:9; 14:6; 20:3,8). Christ Jesus maintained this distinction for He sent His disciples to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and later sent Paul to the Gentiles. The distinction is maintained in the person of Christ, for He is the same race in eternity as He was during His incarnation. The New Jerusalem was let down out of heaven upon the new earth (Rev. 21:1-3), “And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it… And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it” (Rev. 21:24, 26). The “nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it” shows that the distinction is maintained or perpetuated into eternity. God was the one who divided by lands, languages, races and nations (Gen. 10:5; Deut. 32:8; Acts 17:26). God condemned those who would remove these distinctions (Deut. 7:3; Ezra 9-10; Neh. 9:2; 13:3, 23 ff [see Neh. 9-13]). Miscegenation or racial interbreeding is not the way of God as His Word bears out in the passages just mentioned and others (Judges 6:5-7; Num. 25:1-9; Deut. 7:1-6). Abraham and Isaac forbade that their sons should marry Canaanites (Gen. 24; 27). Some would say that the point is Canaanites were unbelievers. Is that the only factor? Esau’s rebellion was seen in his miscegenation (Gen. 25-28). Is Esau considered a believer? Was Esau an unbeliever marrying unbelievers? Then what was the factor in his wrongdoing? The Lord did not even teach the amalgamation of fabrics, seeds, creatures, etc. (Lev. 19:19). Certainly God cannot be charged with racism since He created and established the races. He cannot be charged with racism when He made Israel His chosen nation. They were God’s preferred race. Modern men have so perverted language that racism is a word without a proper denotation and its connotations match the meaning given by the user of the word at the moment. Today men find it an inconvenience to submit to God’s standards, and thus man lives in a world of flux. This is why men reject God’s order.
What is the result of a faulty interpretation of the words “there is neither bond nor free” on the social teachings of the Bible? Again, if the interpretation of this phrase is incorrect it impugns the integrity of God and Scripture. If it is asserted that the redemption of Christ does away with slavery, it also does away with civil freedom. If slavery is evil then God’s character and revelation is condemned as sinful. Domestic slavery was regulated in the Old Testament (Deut. 15:15; Ex. 21:1-27; Lev. 25:25-55).). Slaves could be acquired with money (Gen. 17:12; 37:28), by war (Num. 31:9; 2 Kings 5:2), by birth (Ex. 21:4), by debt (Lev. 25:39, 47) or by gift (Gen. 29:24). Slaves took on a family relationship (Gen. 17:23; Ex. 12:44). Abraham owned slaves (Gen. 14:14; 17:12). The permanent enslavement of Hebrews was discouraged (Ex. 21:1-11; Lev. 25:39-43). However, Old Testament saints were encouraged to buy their permanent slaves from foreigners (Lev. 25:44-46). A man, if need arose, could sell himself as a slave (Lev. 25:47-55). A student of Scripture must remember that God’s law recognized, defined, regulated and defended the rights and duties of both masters and slaves (Ex. 21:20-32). What does the New Testament have to say about slavery after the redemption wrought by Christ? When the runaway slave Onesimus had been converted, Paul sent him back to his master to be a Christian slave. Salvation did not change the natural and social distinction of slavery (Eph. 6:5; 1 Tim. 6:1; Titus 2:9; 1 Pet. 2:18; 1 Cor. 11:3 ff, 14:24 ff; I Tim. 2:11 ff). Philemon, who owned Onesimus’ labor, was instructed on how to deal with him [see the Epistle of Philemon, and for a fuller treatment on this subject see R. L. Dabney’s A Defense of Virginia pp.176 ff]. Paul charged, “Servants or slaves, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ” (Col. 3:22-24; cp. Eph. 6:5-9). “Exhort servants or slaves to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining or embezzling, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things” (Titus 2:9-10). The apostle Peter by inspiration of the Holy Spirit also said, “Servants or slaves, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward or unfair” (1 Pet. 2:18 also see w. 19-21). John Murray made a very valid point in Principles of Conduct when he said, “If the institution is the moral evil it is alleged to be by abolitionists, if it is essentially a violation of basic human right and liberty, if slave-holding is the monstrosity claimed, it is, to say the least, very strange that the apostles who were so directly concerned with these evils did not overtly condemn the institution and require slave-holders to practice emancipation. If slavery per se is immorality and, because of its prevalence, was a rampant vice in the first century, we would be compelled to conclude that the high ethic of the New Testament would have issued its proscription. But this is not what we find.... If it is the evil it is stated to be, we should expect more. The apostles were not governed by that kind of expediency; they openly assailed the institutions of paganism that were antithetical to the faith and morals of Christianity” (p. 94). Remember that Jesus and the apostles did not say slavery was wrong, so we either believe God or man. The truth is that abuses were corrected (Ex. 21:16; Col. 4:1; Luke 10:7; 1 Tim. 5:18). From all appearance it was not the slave’s body but his labor that was owned. A wrong interpretation of our text is in conflict with God and the rest of His holy Word.
What is the result of a false interpretation of the words “there is neither male nor female” on the sexual teachings of the Bible? The result of perverting this phrase also impugns the character of God, destroys the authority structure for the sexes, violates the law of God and undermines the family. This phrase has been falsely called “the cornerstone of women’s liberation.” Those who twist the text to support the mode of the sexual revolution violate Scriptural revelation. This phrase is in harmony with Paul’s other inspired writings which the feminist view denies. It is horrible sacrilege to read into this passage a social theory which makes the sexes interchangeable. The role of men and women was clearly defined before redemption and after. However, to God all things are the eternal now. Being one “in Christ” does not invalidate the sexual differences which God’s creation ordinance has ordained as the separate roles of men and women. Oneness in Christ means that believers benefit equally. This text cannot mean the extinction of biological differences, the endorsement of feminism and the enthronement of sodomy. This perversion of Scripture is in conflict with the plain command of Scripture (Rom. 1:24-27; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 14:34-35; 1 Tim. 1:9-11; Jude 5). The Biblical teaching of the submission of women in the church and in the home is not annulled (1 Cor. 11:2-16; 1 Pet. 3:1-7; 1 Cor. 12:13, 28). The freedom wrought by Christ is not freedom from Biblical law (Rom. 6:15 ff), but it is freedom to obey the law (Gal. 5:13-14).
The three basic principles in the man/woman relationship are revealed in the Old and New Testaments. [1] They are both created in the image of God and have the same relationship to God in salvation through Christ (Gal. 3:28; 1 Pet. 3:7). [2] They both have different roles in the church and in the family (1 Cor. 11:3; 14:34; 1 Tim. 2:11). [3] And there is a union established in the first two principles, that both were created in the image of God with different roles, and they are both in Christ by an act of the divine kind of love (1 Cor. 13; Eph. 5:25-31). The feminist, homosexual or Jacobin interpretation of Galatians 3:28 is a pseudo interpretation and destroys the family which is the primary building block of society. R.L. Dabney was correct when he wrote, “if marriage is reduced to a secular co-partnership of equals, the principles of equity will compel this result, that it shall be terminable upon the plea of either party. This theory thus destroys the family and reduces the relations of the sexes to concubinage, when carried to its logical results.... Such were its fruits in Jacobin France, and in those Swiss, Italian and German cities which adopted the revolutionary philosophy” (p. 316, The Discussions by Robert L. Dabney, Vol. 3). What disasters have been visited upon this society by the perversion of this passage and others as well. The rejection of the truth of the Bible in favor of man’s forced agenda is to reject the rule of God and replace it with the oppressive rule of man. Dabney, in his article on Women’s Rights, concluded that one of the consequences of this movement is, “Women’s Rights means the abolition of all permanent marriage ties.... It must follow by this cause, if for no other, that the unsexed politicating woman can never inspire in man that true affection on which marriage should be founded. Men will doubtless be still sensual; but it is simply impossible that they can desire them for the pure and sacred sphere of the wife. Let every woman ask herself: will she choose for the lord of her affections an unsexed effeminate man? No more can man be drawn to the masculine woman. The mutual attraction of the two complementary halves is gone forever. The abolition of marriage would follow again by another cause. The divergent interests and the rival independence of the two equal wills would be irreconcilable with domestic government, or union, or peace. Shall the children of this monstrous non-union be held responsible to two variant co-ordinate and supreme wills at once? Heaven pity the children! (p. 501 ff, Discussions by Robert L. Dabney, Vol. 4). Another result of the hideous rejection of God’s male/female relationship is homosexuality, the scourge of any society. This is the end result of removing biological differences. Modesty and morality disappear from the culture. How can it be called women’s liberation since bondage and destruction is its result?
CONCLUSION
The product of the false interpretation of Galatians 3:28 or any of God’s inspired Word is catastrophic. When infidel hands handle that which is sacred, they proceed to rape the sacred Word of God with their unclean hands. God’s vengeance often is the fruit of this disobedience. The works of their hands will be rewarded with damnation unless God is pleased to save them by His grace as He did Saul of Tarsus. Repentance of sin and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is the only hope for sinners. And the Scripture reminds us that “all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Salvation is by grace and grace alone. It is not of works because then men would boast of what they did in order to be saved. Godlessness is rewarded with a place called hell where God has withdrawn His presence and mercy. It is where He has engineered fire that cannot be quenched and the never dying worm. The sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were treated to fire and brimstone and eternal damnation. This is the condition of a nation that forgets God after having raped His sacred Scripture.
©1999, Reprinted with Permission
Society for Biblical and Southern Studies
4932 15th Street
Hueytown, AL 35023