Truth Magazine

By Forrest D. Moyer

Looking carefully lest there be any man that falleth short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby the many be defiled (Heb. 12:15).

We have studied quite a bit lately about the grace of God and the fact that no one can merit salvation. We can only be saved because God loved us and through his grace provided a way for our justification. We are saved by grace (Eph. 2:8-9); we stand in grace (Rom. 5:2); we have our daily forgiveness through going to his throne of grace (Heb. 4:14-16). When we get to heaven, we can truly sing, “Amazing Grace” and “Wonderful Grace of Jesus.” How precious is that grace which God has so richly “lavished upon us” (Eph. 1:7-8).

But the Hebrew writer gives to each of us a very solemn warning: “Be careful lest you fall short of the grace of God.” Therefore, it is possible for us to “miss out on” God’s grace. The writer said that it is! Paul also said that it is possible for us to “nullify the grace of God” (Gal. 2:21) and that we can “fall from grace” (Gal. 5:4). Let us never feel that since God loves us and that his grace has forgiven us of our every sin, gross as they may have been, it is still possible for us to “fall short of that grace.” How could we do so?

In the passage under consideration we see some possible ways of our falling short.

(1) We could be defiled by a “root of bitterness.” This is a metaphor borrowed from plants where roots are essential. Moses referred to such in Deuteronomy 29:18 – “a root bearing poisonous fruit and wormwood.” Here, then, are people whose words and life are bitter before God and corrupting to people. The pagan and Judaistic influences of their day tended to draw people away from the grace of God. Today, there is worldliness, humanism, and all kinds of false doctrines that are poisonous to the souls of God’s people. Let us be especially careful.

(2) We could fall short of God’s grace by fornication (v. 16). God’s grace can forgive fornication as is seen in the lives of some of the Corinthians – “such were some of you” (1 Cor. 6:9-11). But his grace is not a free ticket to practice immorality. We cannot pre-suppose the grace of God or be guilty of the sin of presumption. Some have reasoned that since God’s grace will forgive that it does not matter if we go ahead and commit sin. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Some people in the early church were “turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness” (Jude 4). There are many today who look upon sexual misconduct whether before or after marriage as of little consequence. Paul tells us that those who practice such cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven (Gal. 5:19-21). John says that such will have their part in the lake of fire (Rev. 21:8). If you are involved in sexual sin, repent right now and live a life of moral purity lest you fall short of God’s grace.

(3) The writer speaks of “any profane person” such as Esau (v. 16). The word used here is bebelos and means unhallowed. It is used for profane in opposition to consecrated. “Bebelos is used for the person who is uninitiated and uninterested in contradistinction to the man who is devout” (Barclay). A profane life is one lived without thought of or interest in God. All of its goals and plans are only earthly. If we like that, we fall short of the grace of God which is designed to help us have a “heavenly calling.” All that Esau was concerned about was to satisfy his hunger with the pottage that Jacob was cooking. “Who cares about the future? I am concerned with right now, and I want this!” Oh, how often this becomes our attitude and it leads to our downfall and to our “missing out on the grace of God.” A person’s character is just as strong as the weakest link in it. If, in weak moments, we are concerned only with the present physical appetite, we become a “profane person like Esau.” How bitter were the consequences in his life and in ours when we lose sight of God’s goodness to us. This is why it is so important for us to stay out of situations where we can be tempted, for when the fires of appetite burst out of the furnace of our mind and the flames start to burn, we lose sight of the holy and become “profane like Esau.”

(4) Really, the way we fall short of God’s grace is by “refusing to hear Jesus” (v. 25). Those who refused to hear Moses did not escape. “Much less shall we escape who turn away from him who warns from heaven” (v. 25; see Heb. 10:26-29). If we reject Jesus, we are rejecting God’s grace – “insulting the spirit of grace” for he came and died as the means of establishing the grace of God. Being a Christian is doing whatever Jesus requires of us. If I reject him, I have spurned that matchless grace.

No, don’t think for one moment that God’s grace automatically takes care of all our sins and rejections of his will. “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? May it never be” (Rom. 6: 1). Let us have full faith in the God of grace and accept his grace that will forgive and save us and take us to heaven. But let us never take it for granted and “fall short of the grace of God.”

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, p. 77
February 2, 1989

By W. Frank Walton

A member drops out of sight. After a long while, someone asks, “Where’s brother Blank?” Someone gets around to talking to this absent brother, but by now he’s spiritually “cold” and might not be revived. In another congregation, harsh, hateful words are exchanged in a business meeting. It was all a misunderstanding but now it’s too late – another congregation will be formed and brethren who worshiped together will probably not see or speak to one another for quite a while. Yet, in another church elders are to be selected. But feelings are hurt when ancient incidents are dredged up, which should have been resolved years ago. Now, this church might not have elders for years to come.

What do these situations all have in common? An urgent need to heed Romans 15:14: “And concerning you, my brethren, I myself also am convinced that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, and able to admonish one another” (NASB). Paul knew brethren in Rome were spiritually strong enough to work out any difficulty among themselves. They were sincere and good-hearted. They knew God’s will because they were informed. They would care enough to communicate spiritual warnings to one another. Could Paul have the same confidence in you and the brethren with whom you worship? Do we care enough to give loving correction or constructive criticism? Are we willing to accept it?

Brethren often don’t feel comfortable in being open and honest with one another. Some are so “touchy” that their feelings are easily offended, egos bruised or pride deflated. We all admit we have our faults, that we could do better, and that we could use constructive criticism. But we feel personally attacked so that we don’t welcome helpful comments.

Many times we know of some problem that needs to be pointed out and dealt with, but too often it’s swept under the carpet and overlooked. We’re obligated to lovingly correct a sinning brother (Lk. 17:3). “Admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with all men” (1 Thess. 5:14). This takes initiative, concern and involvement to speak the right word at the right time. Will we care enough to communicate concern to one who is apathetically wandering away from Christ? Will we speak a kind, encouraging word to refresh a struggling soul? Also, patience in personal relationships helps us cut some slack for others. We need to be as understanding with them as we are with ourselves and as we wish others to be with us.

What are some practical things to remember in admonishing (warning, correcting) and communicating with one another?

Things To Avoid

1. Don’t assume too much or the worst. Don’t put them on trial as being guilty until proven innocent. “Love . . . thinks no evil” (1 Cor. 13:4,5, NKJV). Get your exercise, in other ways instead of jumping to conclusions. “He who gives an answer before he hears, it is folly and shame to him” (Prov. 18:13). Get all the facts.

2. Don’t be disgusted with others, thinking they’ll never change. No person is hopeless. What’s the worst thing you’ve ever done? God loved us when we were ungodly rebels (Rom. 5:8). God never gives up on us.

3. Don’t dredge up the past as today’s ammunition. God doesn’t bring up the past against us (Heb. 8:12). Since we’re his children, let’s not imitate the Devil who is “the accuser of our brethren” (Rev. 12:10). Any hostile critic or thoughtless person can pass along inaccurate, unfair or baseless innuendo. You’ll find what you’re looking for in others, if you want to badly enough. Gossip is the Devil’s brew. Such “corrupt communication” (Eph. 4:29) pollutes the air of brotherly relationships. Don’t talk to everyone else who isn’t involved about the problem.

4. Don’t belittle, ridicule, talk down to or “tell someone off for their own good. ” Rash, acidic words can’t be recalled. Admonishing someone isn’t just getting an obligation off our chest. This is cold and uncaring. Instead of thinking, “I just don’t understand how they could do this,” try to empathize. Understand we all have weakness and blind spots. Don’t just find fault and exaggerate: “You always . . . you never . . . every time I turn around, etc.” But find a solution – together!

Guidelines To Remember

1. Let’s form closer brotherly relationships. “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor” (Rom. 12:10). We’re not just to tolerate one another. It’s hard to confront a stranger. But love shows we’re following Christ. Our common hope draws us closer together as family. Family love is optimistic and persistent. It “bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails” (1 Cor. 13:7-8a). Love is demonstrated in outgoing care for one another’s welfare. When this is obvious, we can be open and honest with one another. We won’t fear to speak what’s weighing heavily on our minds.

2. Criticism should be directed at the performance (the act) and not as an attack against the person. Most brethren are basically good, or they wouldn’t even bother claiming to be part of God’s household.

3. Be reasonable, fair and realistic. Look at all the names listed in your directory. Imagine all the trials, temptations and problems each one faces daily. Before Ezekiel preached to the exiles, the Lord wanted him to empathize with his audience: “I sat where they sat” (3:15, NKJV). Think, “How would I feel if this fault was pointed out to me?” Don’t expect more of others than you do of yourself.

4. Show in the Bible why something is wrong and needs to be corrected. Help them to see in God’s “mirror” of truth. This helps to show it’s not just a matter of personal opinion or taste.

5. Give reasons for change from the Bible. “If you fix your mind on the right things, you won’t be tempted so much and your attitude will change” (cf. Rom. 12:2; Phil. 4:8; Prov. 23;7). Or, “God promises us that if we put up a fight resisting the devil, instead of listening to his temptation, that he will flee from us” (Jas. 4:7). “If we feed our faith, it will be stronger and won’t fail us” (Lk. 22:32). Being “filled with all knowledge” helps us to apply Scripture to each situation. But give incentives for them to change . We have the potential to do better. Encourage them by painting the picture of them overcoming (Jas. 1:22-25).

6. Tone is important (Prov. 15:1). It’s not always what we say, but how we say it that helps effective communication (Col. 4:6). Each person is different. It takes practice and prayer for wisdom to sense the unique situation of each person. Be perceptive and kind in finding the right words and place to talk. Be non-threatening and on their side. “How can we work on this? What do we need to do to change the situation for the better?” Anticipate their reaction so you can defuse defensiveness. “You might be thinking this . . . I know how you feel . . . I know what you mean … I’ve had a hard time with this too … I’ve made the same mistake before and now what you’re facing . . . I wish I had someone to talk with me to help me, but I had to learn the hard way.”

Make sure they understand the reasons for the correction or warning. Make sure they know you care about, identify with and understand them and the problem.

7. Commit yourself to help. “But encourage one another day after day, as long as it it called ‘Today,’ lest any one of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin” (Heb. 3:13). We all need each other and constructive criticism. We all are sinners, since we all have faced temptation and have succumbed to the Devil’s wiles. We can draw support and count on one another to help in time of need (Gal. 6:1-2). In the Lord’s army, we shouldn’t shoot our wounded. Let’s lift one another up as we march arm in arm toward heaven’s glory.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, pp. 83-84
February 2, 1989

By Kenneth E. Thomas

Recently on a radio call-in program supported by a local church of Christ, the movie, “The Last Temptation of Christ,” was discussed. If the movie does indeed portray our Savior as only a man who was guilty of fornication (or any sin for that matter) as it is reported to do, I certainly want to raise my voice against such a portrayal of the Son of God as much as any other Christian who believes in the sinless perfection of Jesus (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15; etc.). One caller asked the host of the program if he did not agree that those who did not write letters of protest to the theaters who were showing the film were guilty before God of bidding God speed to their error? Neither of the hosts disagreed with the caller and one agreed that those who do not are guilty of sin. They based their conclusions on Ephesians 5:11 and 2 John 9-11.

Not By Carnal Warfare

I suggest that these brethren are as wrong as they can be! If they are correct then Jesus did indeed sin because, if we are duty bound before God to lead protest marches and letter writing campaigns and other economic means of forcing such people to give up said practices, Jesus had the responsibility to lead protests and letter writing campaigns against the many immoral places such as the brothels and other ungodly places in the Roman Empire which were operating during his time here on earth. Yet, you never read in Scripture nor in secular history that he ever so conducted himself, nor required such of his disciples, but rather said, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would My servants right” (Jn. 18: 36). When Peter was defending Jesus against his captors in Gethsemane with carnal means, drawing Ins sword and cutting off the ear of Malcus, a servant of the Jewish high priest, Jesus said to Peter, “Put up your sword” (Matt. 26:52; Jn. 18:11).

One of the greatest Christians ever, Paul, an apostle of Christ writing by divine inspiration stated, “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:3-5). When brethren attempt to reform the world by economic boycotts or use other pressure tactics and carnal weapons, they become guilty themselves of violating the scriptural way of advancing the cause of Christ, the proclamation of his word to a sin-sick world (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16). Men and women must first be converted to Christ then taught how to live for him. To try to force the world to live by the will of Christ through whatever the means, is to be guilty of “casting your pearls before the swine (unconverted, ket) . . . they will only turn and rend you” (Matt. 7:6).

The Social Gospel

We (who call ourselves “conservative”) stand opposed to the “social gospel” approach of attempting to convert folks to Christ as unscripturally trying to change society using physical, rather than spiritual, means to that desired end, the preaching of the truth of the gospel, God’s drawing, saving, and transforming power (2 Thess. 2:13-14; Rom. 1:16-17; Col. 3:14; Rom. 12:1-2). Then some turn around and attempt to force society into conforming to the will of Christ by using all manner of pressure tactics. Brethren, this is practicing the social gospel just as surely as are the folks who offer all manner of physical enticements to get people to become Christians! My brethren who oppose the social gospel should know better than this!

Change The World By Changing The Man

You’ve probably heard the story of the man trying to put a jigsaw puzzle of the world together without success. His young son, knowing that on the back side of the puzzle was the picture of a man; turned the pieces over and put together the picture of a man. Then he turned the puzzle over and the world was also intact. “See, Dad, when you get the man straight the world’s alright too, exclaimed the lad.” How true! We need to be busy teaching the truth. We should refuse to view obscene movies and read pornographic literature or listen to filthy lyrics of any music, whether country, pop, or rock and roll so far as our own habits are concerned. We must instill in our offspring the same principles since we are responsible to train them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4).

Get Into Their Homes

If only more Christians were in the homes of our friends, relatives, and associates engaged in Bible study classes telling them of the Savior of all mankind, we could have a much greater impact on society than we are at present, and we would not have time to picket the smut peddlers. We would convert them to Christ if possible and then they would not buy, view, or sell such garbage.

They Get Free Advertisement

Recently on TV someone connected with the controversial film under discussion, said, “All of this opposition by Christians will assure us of a box office boom.” We should work as leavening in flour in society, gently and quietly affecting those whom our lives touch; we should preach against the film certainly. We should reprove, rebuke and exhort every kind of error, but force unbelievers? No!

If as an advocated in the radio program under consideration we must get involved in trying to. force people not to show this film, we must do the same wherever alcohol is sold or where gambling is practiced, etc. Consistency would demand us to use the same measures against all ungodliness. But as already pointed out, our roll should be to preach the powerful word of Jesus to a lost and sin-cursed world and leave the results up to the Lord (1 Cor. 3:6; Acts 8:4; 1 Thess. 1:8-10).

It is possible that a kind well-written letter to the proper ones who could control the production and distribution of things which any thinking person must know can have a detrimental effect on society, could do some good and I am not opposed to such. I do not however believe that one must write such a letter or be guilty of sin. Certainly if we try to run people out of business by getting to their pocketbooks rather than their hearts, more harm than good will result.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, pp. 79, 87
February 2, 1989

By P.J. Casebolt

When I began preaching in the late 40’s, divorce was not as prevalent in society and in the church as it is today. Among preachers of my acquaintance in the Ohio Valley, most held that Matthew 19:9 set forth the only exception for divorce/remarriage, i.e., fornication.

One preacher, brother Ross Swindler of Parkersburg, West Virigina, held the position that ‘ Matthew 19:9 was under the law of Moses, and that there was no cause for divorce/remarriage. But, his position was not generally known, advocated, or held by other brethren.

In the winter of 1950-5 1, brother Kenneth Adams, of the Lynn Street congregation in Parkersburg, preached in a meeting for the old South Side congregation where brother Swindler was located. During that meeting, brother Adams preached one night on the subject of divorce/remarriage, espoused the position held by brother Swindler, and brother Swindler publicly endorsed the sermon.

This account is brief, and not intended to reflect upon brethren Adams or Swindler. Both were good friends of mine, and both were held in high esteem by brethren in general. I’m simply trying to chronicle the evolution of the divorce/remarriage problem as it pertained to that geographical area of the brotherhood.

The very next day I went to brother Adams’ study at the Lynn Street church building and talked with him at length concerning his new position. I did not go with the intention of converting him, but I could see some inconsistencies in his position, and wanted to clarify them for my own benefit. And,,though I do not believe my visit had anything to do with it, within a relatively short time, brother Adams reversed his position, reverting to Matthew 19:9 as the only exception for divorce/remarriage.

Shortly after brother Adams preached his “no cause” sermon, brother L.J. Keffer of Paden City, WV, came to Williamstown (where I was located), for a meeting. He announced that he would preach one night on divorce/remarriage, and many of the same brethren who had heard brother Adams attended the meeting, including brother Adams himself.

Brother Keffer not only took exception to the “no cause for divorce” position advocated by brother Adams, but added a second cause for divorce/remarriage based on the “unbeliever” clause in 1 Corinthians 7:15.

About this time brethren learned that brother Keffer was involved in a marriage relationship which corresponded to his position on 1 Corinthians 7:15. A few of us had also heard of the “Fuqua position” via the Vindicator, but Texas seemed a long way off, and our geographical area had not been influenced to a great extent by brother Fuqua’s position.

During this skirmish in 1950-51, one old preacher safely remarked that the divorce problem reared its head about every twenty years, but when it blew over, most brethren settled back to the position which hinged on Matthew 19:9 as the only cause for divorce/remarriage.

It has since occurred to me that a new generation enters the. marriage relationship about every twenty years, and maybe the old preacher had a point, though he may not have known why. Or, maybe he did.

The Hinge

When the enemies of Jesus requested a watch to guard his tomb they knew that his cause hinged on a resurrection of the dead. If they could prevent even an apparent resurrection (a body whisked away by his disciples), then the death and burial of Jesus would mean nothing without a resurrection to go with those two events. All hinged on the resurrection.

When Martin Luther encountered James 2:24, he knew that his doctrine of “faith only” hinged on this passage. One or the other had to go. Luther decided to reject not only James 2:24, but the entire epistle of James as “spurious.”

When the advocates of the sponsoring church concept of cooperation came face to face with Philippians 4:15,16, they knew that either their system or the passage in Philippians had to go. All hinged on whether or not an approved apostolic example was binding. They decided to keep their sponsoring church concept, and reject the apostolic example principle.

With the same swipe of Jehoiakim’s penknife, these brethren cut out Acts 20:7 as the exclusive time for observing the Lord’s supper, because this passage contains only an approved apostolic example. It didn’t seem to matter that the apostle Paul commands us to observe an approved apostolic example (Phil. 4:9).

In my judgment, the entire matter of divorce/remarriage hinges on Matthew 19:9. Others must think so too, given the efforts to either neutralize or eliminate it altogether.

Even as Jesus said to Satan, “It is written again. . . ” (Matt. 4:7), so must we hear all that is said on any subject. Marriage is not even the primary subject under discussion in Romans 7:1-4, much less divorce. Neither is divorce/remarriage the theme of the passage in 1 Corinthians 7.

Given the epidemic of divorce/remarriage and its effect upon the church, it is tempting to take a position that would rule out divorce for any reason. It is also tempting to find a cause to keep people from marrying in the first place, if that would solve the divorce problem. But, it is never right to “do evil that good may come” (Rom. 3:8).

Personally, I’m not willing to pay the high cost of trying to escape the force of even one verse of Scripture (e.g., Matt. 19:9), much less face the consequences of eliminating the first four epistles of the New Testament. Some claim that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are not a part of the new covenant (in order to eliminate Matt. 19:9), while others stop short of that position, claiming that Matthew 19:9 applies only to God’s people, and not to the alien sinner.

Too much hinges on Matthew 19:9, and when you break this hinge, the whole gate falls. When the gate falls, you may as well remove the entire fence.

Even if we do not go so far as to remove the whole fence, someone else in the next generation will, either post by post, strand by strand, or by a stampede. The epidemic of sundry and conflicting positions on divorce/remarriage within the past two decades is evidence that the gate is off the hinges, and the whole fence is in danger of being trampled down.

I do not want to be caught in that stampede, nor do I want to be found anywhere near it when the Lord comes.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 3, pp. 75-76
February 2, 1989