Truth Magazine

By Aude McKee

Preachers often lay themselves open for adverse criticism by going to houses to talk with a woman with a problem, or meeting them in the church office where the two are alone together for a period of time. Carefulness on the part of a preacher in taking his wife with him, or having the woman meet him in his home instead of the office, could save one from actual sin or reputation-destroying rumors.

Carelessness on the part of a preacher in his dress, conduct, and speech, not only opens the doors for temptation, but may provoke comments and accusations that taint one’s reputation for purity. “He’s a ladies man” and “Just can’t keep his hands off the ladies” are comments provoked by the conduct of some.

Too much familiarity with certain ones – much togetherness – where all laugh unblushingly at some shady, suggestive incident or tale, is a sign that one might respond to “a pass” if made. Many have become guilty of sin by traveling this path. Others, though not yielding, have been suspected of yielding by observers of their actions. When preachers have great temptation suddenly thrust upon them, in most cases I’m sure, some look, work, or act on the part of the preacher gave the temptress the idea he might respond. The preacher may have had no thought of conveying such a message, but his careless words or actions did, never the less, leave that impression.

There is never a time or place where God’s teacher can be “off-guard” for his reputation as a servant of God is always at stake. And, reputation, as we have observed, has a tremendous impact for good and evil.

I commend the editor of this paper for devoting an entire issue to the problem of immorality among members of the body of Christ. I doubt that any of us living can correctly assess the damage done to the person directly involved, to those of his immediate family, to the church generally, and to those not Christians. To dismiss the problem with the observation that “we are all human,” or “preachers have feet of clay like everyone else,” is to whitewash it. To equate the sin with saying a bad word when you hit your thumb with a hammer is to fail to take the circumstances into account. To think that a man can have the same influence as he preaches oft the need for moral purity immediately after his confession of sin, is to ignore human nature. In short, the ten areas to be investigated in this special issue seem to me to have been well chosen. I trust that none who read this issue will be guilty of accusing those who have written of being self-righteous. Humility is a quality desperately needed on the part of both those who have fallen into this sin and those who have been able to avoid it. We write, not to hurt those who have sinned, but to encourage others to live above it.

Need To Look Ahead

Living a life free of immorality is sort of like driving an automobile. You have to learn early to put the brakes on well before you intend to stop. You are driving down the street approaching a busy intersection of 40 MPH. The stop sign is directed at you, not the cross traffic. About ten feet before you reach the intersection, you put your brakes on, slide through, and a terrible wreck occurs. When the traffic officer questions you, your defense is that- you put the brakes on. His reply would be, “I observed that from the skid marks, but you didn’t put the brakes on soon enough.” I dare say there has not been a single Christian guilty of an immoral affair in the past ten years but what knew the sin was approaching! Instead of “putting the brakes on,” they continued “full speed ahead” and lives were wrecked. Now notice the effect immorality has on the teacher’s family.

Emotions Aroused

We mentioned a moment ago that lives are wrecked as a result of a teacher’s immorality. Not wrecked beyond repair, but wrecked, nevertheless. We hear the rumor: “It just cannot be true,” we say, and then the confirmation that brings the emotions so varied in nature. First there is sorrow – deep and intense. In most cases, the sorrow on the part of the immediate family is worse than if the person had died. Instead of a soul separated from the body, a soul has been separated from God and that is far worse.

Then when a little time has passed, probably some other emotions begin to surface. Anger is one of them. The thoughtlessness of the act has an impact. How could a man put a faithful wife through such an ordeal? Why didn’t he think about the effect on his children? Probably there have been family members who, for a time, wished that the “forty stripes save one” was still in vogue.

Then there’s the shame. Immorality may not be disgraceful on the part of many in the world today it it is still disgraceful in the eyes of God and faithful Christians. A reader may be inclined to say, “It is no more disgraceful than lying or stealing,” and perhaps that is true, but immorality is still disgraceful. Members of the sinner’s family hang their heads in shame, not for themselves but for the sinner.

Then, there is the emotion of self-incrimination usually endured by the teacher’s family. “Where have I failed?” “What did I do that caused this to happen?” This is a terrible burden to bear and probably some family members carry the load to their graves. It seems that in the more recent past, society has leaned toward the idea that wrongdoing is the result of upbringing, environment, etc., and that little or no blame can be laid at the doorstep of the sinner. We would not write one line that would relieve husbands, wives, children or parents of their God-given responsibilities, but the truth remains that the sinner has responsibility for his own conduct. We have often impressed the truth (from Ezek. 18:20) that the “son does not bear the iniquity of the father,” but it is just as true that the “father does not bear the iniquity of the son. ” Surely the principle would apply as fully to husbands and wives. Diffused throughout all of this is love. No stronger emotion can fill a person’s heart, and out of this comes the patience and forbearance and every deed designed to bring the sinner to repentance and restoration to God and the family. Love may be tarnished, for the moment, but it lives – “love never fails.”

Loss of Credibility

Another thing that must surely happen in a teacher’s family, when immorality has stained the relationship, is a loss of trust, confidence and leadership in those areas where it is most vital. The Holy Spirit, in 1 Corinthians 6:13-20, made it clear that an immoral person lacks respect for himself. He lacks self-esteem. “The body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body” (v. 13b). Think about what it means for a person to voluntarily put himself in a position where he can no longer teach his children what it means to be holy in body. What man or woman wants to be in a position where it must be, “Do as I say, not as I do”?

The story has often been repeated about J.W. McGarvey and his position on instrumental music in the worship. He taught young preachers in his Bible classes that instrumental music was unscriptural and then he would often worship with those churches that used it. His comment, as I recall was, “My influence went with my practice and not my teaching.” All of us lose credibility when we fail to practice what we preach, and it is probably most true at home than anywhere.

The teacher who is guilty of immorality also lacks respect for the Lord Jesus, the Holy Spirit and God. Paul said our bodies are the members of Christ (v. 15). Where is my respect for Christ when I will use my body in an immoral way? Not only that, but our bodies are the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit (v. 19). If I make the dwelling place so filthy He can’t live there, how much respect have I shown for the Occupant? Also, God owns our bodies and He is to be glorified in them (vv. 19-20). If I use my body so that it reflects discredit upon the Owner, my conduct shows a lack of regard for the Owner. Hasn’t my credibility (basis of trust) been destroyed by my conduct? How can I lead my family under such circumstances?

A third thing a teacher does who is guilty of immorality, is to reveal his lack of regard for the institution of marriage. In verse 16 of the passage referred to above, we are told: “Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? For two, saith He, shall be one flesh. ” The $gone flesh” relationship has been reserved by God for marriage and marriage alone. In the beginning (Gen. 2:24), God made Eve for Adam and said that Adam should cleave to Eve, “and they shall be one flesh.” Anyone who has a sexual relationship outside of marriage, shows his disregard for God’s arrangements. In Hebrews 13:4, the writer said, “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled . . . ” (NASV). Our point just here is, how can a teacher lead his family into a deep respect for marriage when he does not have a wholesome regard for it?

We try, to the best of our ability, to teach our children to have the kind of vision Moses had. He could see the “reward” far of in eternity, and this motivated him to “refuse to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter” (Heb. 11:24). My brothers and sisters in Christ, we plead that you look at the consequences of immorality and before you take the first step in that direction, decide that the price is too great. If the loss of credibility in your own family relationship was the only price you would have to pay, it is far too great!

More Visible Effects

Tragic as it is, a painful reality that almost every immoral teacher must face is the disruption of his relationship with the local congregation. This disruption has a number of serious side effects, but we are concerned here with the effect on the teacher’s family. Moving is never easy on the family, but to move “under a cloud” must be especially difficult. There is probably not a preacher among us but what has spent some near-sleepless nights over a move and the effect it would have on his family. Will the children be “provoked to wrath” (Eph. 6:4), by being taken away from their friends and moved into a strange city? Is it fair to the wife to be put through this strain again? Am I doing the right thing? Will my move benefit the church I am leaving as well as the one to which I am going? Then after much prayer and the encouragement of the family to do what we believe to be best for the Lord’s cause, the decision is made. But can you imagine a move being necessary because of immorality? This move is not one that is planned to take place during the summer months, but comes in the middle of a school year. The wife does not rejoice in the inconveniences she has to endure instead, she has to pack, leave dear friends, and face new ones from whom the truth must be hidden, because her husband did not practice self-control.

But much more tragic than the disruption of the family’s living arrangements, is the disruption in the family unity itself. How often in recent years have we known of deacons, elders, preachers and other Christians who have fallen prey to immorality and have been unwilling to repent. In some cases divorce has resulted and separation in others. This writer can understand how a person might, under strong temptation, be guilty of an act of immorality, but I am completely unable to comprehend how a knowledgeable teacher of God’s Word could decide to go to hell in order to maintain an unlawful sexual relationship! Jesus one time asked the question, “For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul, Or what shall a man give in “change for his soul?” (Matt. 16:26). Perry Como at one time had a song being played quite often that was titled, “It’s Just Impossible.” As he spoke of his love for a woman he said, “I would sell my very soul and not regret it.” Sadly we have to say that it is not just a song Como used to sing; it is a refrain being sung by too many members of the church today. Too many children have seen their parents’ relationship dissolved because lust was conceived and allowed to control the life. James, over 1900 years ago, penned these lines: “Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin, and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death” (Jas. 1:14-15).

Throughout this article, I have wanted to use the word “selfish” and perhaps now is the time to apply it. Among all the other causes for the terrible situation that exists among members of the Lord’s church in regard to immorality, selfishness must rank near the top. To see the agony through which a faithful mate must pass, and the grief that overflows the hearts of the children, a man would have to be selfish to the core to cause that for a season of pleasure. In Philippians 2:2-8, the concern a Christian ought to have for others is emphasized. “Fulfill ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man on the things of others. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus. Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God. But made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.”

May all who read these lines have the wisdom to look down the road and see the consequences of immorality. Think of the emotions that will be aroused in the hearts of your own family. Consider what it means to lose credibility in the eyes of those with whom you have the closest personal relationship in this life. Let your mind dwell on what it will mean to your wife and children to have to move, but, most of all, think what it would mean to see your family unit destroyed by your lust and immorality. We hope that these considerations will help to stem the tide of immorality that threatens the church for which Jesus died.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 1, pp. 11-13
January 5, 1984

By Herschel Patton

A sage has said “What you are thunders so loud I cannot hear what you say.” It has ever been true that to be an effective teacher one must practice what he or she teaches.

“Reputation is what men and women think of us; character is what God and Angels know of us” (Paine, New Dictionary of Thoughts). What men and women think of us affects our teaching effectiveness. Thus, the Lord said, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 5:16). He severely censured those “who say and do not” (Matt. 23:3). Our reputation, therefore, has a great impact upon those we seek to teach. It will either cause them to listen attentively and obediently, or turn them away in disgust. Teachers cannot be too careful about their reputation. If people are going to be induced to accept the truth, their teacher must be one who walks in truth. Flaws in the teacher will hamper the effectiveness of teaching, either turning people “off” or lead them to accept the flaws.

Carefulness about reputation is even more important when we realize that just one flaw or slip-up may damage the effectiveness of a teacher with many and for years. “A fair reputation is a plant delicate in it’s nature, and by no means rapid in its growth. It will not shoot up in a night, like the gourd of the prophet, but like the gourd, it may perish in a night” (Jeremy Taylor, New Dictionary of Thoughts).

Divorcing Reputation and Teaching

We are living in an . age when the reputation (life-style, personal habits) of a teacher should, in the minds of many, be divorced from the work of teaching. This is the philosophy of humanism, where emphasis is placed upon self-satisfaction without regard to others. It is argued that homosexuality or any chosen life-style has no effect upon one’s work of teaching, or any other work, and should be ignored in all cases. This philosophy is wide-spread and very influential today, even in high places, including the church.

Just recently a high court ruled that a school teacher, unmarried but pregnant, who had been fired by a school board, was to be reinstated to her job and given back pay. The school board argued that the influence of the teacher upon her young students was not good and out of line with the moral concepts of her students and their parents. It is a sad day when the high courts of the land will encourage and promote immorality over morality and decency, which are the fruit of faith.

This thinking in religious circles, especially the church, is particularly absurd and ridiculous in view of the Bible teaching that what the teacher is cannot be separated from the teaching. In fact, it is the impact of what the teacher is and teaches that caused the Holy Spirit to warn, “My brethren, be not many teachers, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation” (Jas. 3:1).

Impact of Reputation

Besides the sins of adultery, lying, and murder committed by David, God’s king and religious leader, the prophet in indicting him said, “Because of this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme” (2 Sam. 12:14).

David repented of his sins, and was forgiven, but the impact of sin on the part of this religious leader upon others (giving them occasion to blaspheme) and his own personal hurt and loss (death of the child), he could do nothing about. This is an example of the impact of a leader’s reputation when he sins.

I have known preachers, elders, deacons, song leaders, and class teachers falling into fleshly and doctrinal sin. Some never returned unto the Lord, but become complete apostates. Others repented and worked diligently at rebuilding their reputation.

Enemies of the Lord and “the Faith” like to point with glee to the apostasy of former “pillars” in the church. When those “of reputation” in the church apostatize, it always gives occasion for enemies of the Lord to blaspheme. This is the impact of a teacher’s damaged reputation.

Even those who repent and retain their faith cannot take away this impact of their sin, except through time and effort given to regrowing that fragile plant of reputation which was broken. The future work of one whose repuation has been shattered will be hindered and this is part of the impact of a damaged reputation. Another lesson is to be presented in this series of “Putting the Pieces Back Together”, which will deal with how soon and to what extent one who has fallen can effectively resume his former leadership position. I do not want to infringe upon that article, but whatever such an individual is deprived of, or made to suffer, as consequences of his fall is a part of the impact of a damaged reputation and, therefore, also a part of my subject.

When one thus sins, even though he genuinely repents and is forgiven by the Lord and brethren, he should not desire or expect brethren to immediately put him back into a leadership role because of the impact of a damaged reputation upon others. Enemies of the Lord will not know of the repentance, or if they have heard, call it superficial and insincere, and will continue to use the sin as an occasion to blaspheme. Too, younger people in the church, when they see one quickly filling a leadership roll after sinning so greviously, may conclude that if they thus fell, the consequences wouldn’t be so bad – that the damage done from the standpoint of personal hurt to themselves, others, and giving occasion for enemies to blaspheme can be just as quickly removed and forgotten as the forgiveness of God. This, of course, just is not so.

Elders who are aware of and greatly concerned about the impact of reputation are wise and right when they, before restoring a penitent fallen one to a teaching or leadership role, require time and diligence for growing again that tender plant of reputation that was so quickly and grievously broken.

Servants of the Lord need to realize that when they fall into sin, fleshly or doctrinally, they not only must have the forgiveness of God and brethren, but must suffer certain consequences of their sin even after being forgiven. David learned this in the loss of the child, the influence for evil on his other children, and the tormenting knowledge that the Lord was being blasphemed because of his sin. Truly, “A reputation once broken may possibly be repaired, but the world will always keep their eye on the spot where the crack was” (Josheph Hall, New Dictionary of Thoughts). This is just part of the impact of a leaders broken reputation.

Other Areas

Reputation is to be highly guarded, not only in regard to fleshly sins, but even in areas of human judgment. The Holy Spirit directs us to “provide things honest in the sight of all men” (Rom. 12:17). “Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time” (Col. 4:5).

Paul, when collecting funds to be taken to Jerusalem for poor saints, required that others “of reputation” among the churches be selected to travel with him “avoiding this, that no man should blame us in this abundance which is administered by us: providing for honest things, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men” (2 Cor. 8:20-21).

There have been instances of men, with good reputations, being found guilty of stealing from the Lord’s treasury. It is wise for two or three men to count the collection, and the treasurer give an itemized report regularly of income and expenditures. This would not only remove the temptation for one to steal from the treasury, but would keep one from being suspected or accused.

Preachers often lay themselves open for adverse criticism by going to houses to talk with a woman with a problem, or meeting them in the church office where the two are alone together for a period of time. Carefulness on the part of a preacher in taking his wife with him, or having the woman meet him in his home instead of the office, could save one from actual sin or reputation-destroying rumors.

Carelessness on the part of a preacher in his dress, conduct, and speech, not only opens the doors for temptation, but may provoke comments and accusations that taint one’s reputation for purity. “He’s a ladies man” and “Just can’t keep his hands off the ladies” are comments provoked by the conduct of some.

Too much familiarity with certain ones – much togetherness – where all laugh unblushingly at some shady, suggestive incident or tale, is a sign that one might respond to “a pass” if made. Many have become guilty of sin by traveling this path. Others, though not yielding, have been suspected of yielding by observers of their actions. When preachers have great temptation suddenly thrust upon them, in most cases I’m sure, some look, work, or act on the part of the preacher gave the temptress the idea he might respond. The preacher may have had no thought of conveying such a message, but his careless words or actions did, never the less, leave that impression.

There is never a time or place where’God’s teacher can be “off-guard” for his reputation as a servant of God is always at stake. And, reputation, as we have observed, has a tremendous impact for good and evil.

The Broken Pinion

By. H. Butterworth

I walked through the woodland meadows,

Where sweet the thrushes sing,

And I found on a bed of mosses

A bird with a broken wing.

I healed its wound, and each morning

It sang its old, sweet strain;

But the bird with a broken pinion

Never soared as high again.

I found a young life broken

By sin’s seductive art,

And touched with Christ-like pity.

I took him to my heart.

He lived with a noble purpose,

And struggled not in vain;

But the life that sin had stricken

Never soared as high again.

But the bird with the broken pinion

Kept another from the snare;

And the life that sin had stricken

Raised another from despair.

Each loss has its compensation –

There is healing for every pain;

But the bird with the broken pinion

Never soars as high again.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 1, pp. 9-11
January 5, 1984

By Marshall E. Patton

The issue of morality under study in this special series of articles is such as to cause every sincere Christian to cry out, “Why Ate So Many Falling?” Both the gravity and the magnitude of the problem demand a Bible answer. One man’s opinion is as good as another. Our answer must be found in the word of God.

While the cause of immorality may vary (at least in degree) from one case to another, a study of the causes set forth in the Scriptures will help us to both pin point the trouble and correct it.

The Heart

The Bible teaches that the heart is the fountain of all our outward activity: “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for, out of it are the issues of life” (Prov. 4:23). Again, “For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he” (Prov. 23:7). Jesus said, “. . . whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matt. 5:28). If the fountain be poisoned, the stream that flows from it will be impure. When the lawyer asked, “Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? ” Jesus replied, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And a second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets” (Matt. 22:36-40).

Since the whole of God’s law hangs on these two commands, it follows that every command is expressive of either love for God or love for man, and of the two the former is greater than the latter. Why is this so? Because one may love his neighbor and not love God – many do, including infidels. However, it is impossible for one to love God and not love his neighbor. Since God commands us to love our fellow man, we cannot love Him and do otherwise. Hence, love for God is the greater command. Love in the heart for God will regulate our every action toward our fellow man so that our every deed is right. The need of the hour is to get man’s heart right with God!

When Potiphar’s wife enticed Joseph, the motivating power that enabled.him to “flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18) was his love for God. He said, “How then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?” (Gen. 39:9). True, Joseph had regard for Potiphar and did not want to .sin against him, but this was not the motivating force that gave him the victory. I am sure he did not want to sin against Potphar’s wife, but, again, this was not the consideration that enabled him to withstand the temptation. He perhaps had little respect for women of her stripe. That which gave him power to overcome was the reverence in his heart for God.

The prodigal son came home after “he came to himself” (Lk. 15:17). This he did when he realized his sin was “against heaven” (Lk. 15:18). Primarily, his attitude of heart toward God accounts for his restoration. Love for God – “with all the heart” – will not only prevent immorality, it will also effect a cure.

Brethren need to remember that though one may be as “sharp as a briar” intellectually, and though he speak with eloquence in proclaiming the truth, such is no guarantee that he loves God with all the heart. Jesus said of some in His day, “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me” (Matt. 15:8). The praise of men and the honor and glory that rightfully attaches itself to such teaching presents a strong temptation, especially to youth. I would say to all who would teach the word of God, if you do not “love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,” then do not teach! The responsibility is too great, the impact of failure too far reaching, and the condemnation too fearful (Jas. 3: 1).

Self-Confidence Vs. Humility

When Jesus said to the apostles, “All ye shall be offended because of me this night,” impulsive Peter responded, “Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended” (Matt. 26:31,33). Peter even boasted of his loyalty above that of his fellows. Jesus said further, “That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice” (Matt. 26:34). Peter, as though the Lord did not know him, replied, “Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee” (Matt. 26:35). 0, what confidence Peter had in himself! Yet, a few hours later, when “the cock crew,” Peter had already denied the Lord three times. Then remembering the words of Jesus, “he went out, and wept bitterly” (Matt. 26:69-75).

I can well understand Peter’s embarrassment, humiliation, and evasiveness when our Lord, after His resurrection, asked him, “. . lovest thou me . . .?” (Jn. 21:15). The Greek word for love in this question is agapao which means love in the sense of loyalty. It never fails – it does what is right regardless. Peter replied, “Lord, thou knowest that I love thee.” Peter used the Greek word Phileo for love which means affection. While this is love that is sweet, beautiful, and precious, it will sometimes fail in the face of duty. Peter is an example. This experience presents quite a contrast to the one on the night of our Lord’s betrayal. In the former Peter is self-confident. In the latter he is humble to perhaps the greatest degree humanly possible.

There are many today who have fallen and who now look back with humiliation to a point in their life when they needlessly subjected themselves to temptation on the basis of self-confidence. Like Peter, they found that they were not as strong as they thought.

Brethren, we need to remember:

“. . our sufficiency is of God” (2 Cor. 3:5).

“Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall” (Prov. 16:18).

“Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12).

“Flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18): “Flee also youthful lusts” (2 Tim. 2:22).

Elsewhere in this series is an article on “Avoiding The Pitfalls” – read it carefully.

Defrauding One Another

Among other things, marriage is set forth in the Scriptures as a means of avoiding fornication:

Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency (1 Cor. 7:2-5).

However, it is obvious from these verses that marriage of itself w ill not suffice. The marriage must be maintained according to God’s pattern. This demands that husband and wife render to each other “due benevolence.” Neither “have power of his (her) own body” for sexual fulfillment. In marriage each surrenders his (her) body to the other that one of the strongest desires implanted in man may have honorable fulfillment. “Defrauding” one another is obviously one cause of fornication. Counselors have long since learned that tension, pouting, frustration, irritability, outburst of uncontrolled temper, and a host of other ills may be attributed to one’s being “defrauded.” Temptation presents itself with almost irresistible force to one thus deprived.

While incompatibility in this matter may present a problem, still with prayer and a sincere, honest objective effort, it can be resolved. Husband and wife must resolve the problem and live together according to God’s pattern.

Modern Society

The influence and pressures of an immoral society have a tremendous impact upon all. The “Sexual Revolution” and the craze for “sexual freedom” have utilized every conceivable means – printed page, radio, TV, school room, and public entertainment activities – so as to make everyone sex conscious every hour of the day. Christians must remember that sin is sin no matter how many people are doing it and no matter how accustomed we become to seeing it. Differentiating between that endorsed, accepted, and practiced by nearly all of our modern society and that governed by the principles of a kingdom bound for eternal glory is the failure of many. John said, “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever” (1 Jn. 2:15-17).

Conclusion

While we live in the world, we are not of it (1 Jn. 15:19). The “pleasures of sin” (Heb. 11:25) are on every hand. They allure and entice so as to make one feel that he just must partake or miss something very good. Such is the deceitfulness of sin-against which we are so often warned (Heb. 3:13; Eph. 4:22; Gal. 6:7,8). Such pleasures are “only for a season” (Heb. 11:25). They cannot abide. They never satisfy. After such deeds are done, the heart is filled with remorse. The fruits of such pleasures are suffering, sorrow, pain, remorse, and all the ills of time – then an eternal hell!

Jesus prayed not that we be taken out of such a society and transplanted into a utopian world, but rather that we be kept from such evil (Jn. 17:15). “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man” (Eccl. 12:13). A more literal translation of the last phrase is “for this is the whole of living.” Here is fulfillment both for time and eternity!

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 1, pp. 7-9
January 5, 1984

By Bobby Witherington

Rest assured, this article is not intended to cast reflection upon any God-fearing preacher who, both in word and deed, has done all within his power to preserve his marriage, but who nevertheless became the innocent victim of someone else’s wrong doing. It must be admitted that preachers’ wives also live in this morally corrupt society, and that some of them, in spite of their husbands’ good example and their own convictions, cave in to those “fleshly lusts, which war against the soul” (1 Pet. 2:11). The innocent preacher whose wife is thus guilty, like any other Christian in a similar situation, is thereby both emotionally and psychologically crushed. Regardless of how innocent he may be, his influence for good is hindered – mainly because he also becomes the object of suspicion. People wonder, “Was he really a good husband to his wife?” “Was his private life out of harmony with his public life?” But honesty compels us to admit that it is possible for one to be innocent of wrong doing against his mate and still suffer martial misfortune. Hence, this article is not written with the intent of adding to the trauma and agony already experienced by the innocent victims of martial disruption.

However, it must be admitted that gospel preachers (also elders) by the score are falling prey to “the lust of the flesh” (1 John 2:16), are committing “fornication” against their wives (Matt. 19:9), and even divorcing the morally pure mothers of their children. Notwithstanding the fact that some have preached the gospel for years and have sought to glorify God in their sermons, they are doing the very thing which “He hateth” (Mal. 2:14-16). They are acting in total opposition to all that they have preached with regards to moral purity and the sanctity of the home. And we are not just referring to a few isolated cases which in the course of a few years’ time surface in different parts of the nation. We are referring to a condition which is becoming disgustingly and increasingly more common. A condition which will send precious souls to hell, and which is adversely affecting both the purity and the growth of that church for which our Savior died.

Of course, we would not charge the guilty person with deliberately planning to do what they did. Most, if not all, were sincere when they vowed before God and man “to keep myself for thee and for thee alone until death we do part.” Most, if not all, viewed with alarm those same sins committed by fellow Christians. Most, if not all, with force and conviction, preached against those very sins in which they themselves later became entangled. Most, if not all, could have never envisioned themselves committing those very sins which destroyed their marriage and which will haunt their memory and mar their influence for the rest of their lives. Most, if not all, can really relate to 1 Corinthians 10: 12 – “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”

But alas, the heretofore unthinkable happened. Men of ability, conviction, courage, and influence have become the unwitting victims of the “deceitfulness of sin” (Heb. 3:13). Time and again, like David of old, we find ourselves lamenting, “How are the mighty fallen!” (2 Sam. 1:19,27). And many of those for whom we lament, like Jonathan of old, fell “in the midst of the battle” (2 Sam 1:25). Some who have fought the hardest to preserve the purity of the church, and to whom we thus owe a great debt of gratitude, failed to preserve their own moral purity. The situation herein described is not one which should cause the godly to gleefully sit back and, in mock tones of superficial righteousness, slander the fallen and glorify self, saying, “In the back of my mind I always had questions about that fellow,” and “I would never do what he did! ” Such is not the time for gloating over the fallen. It is a time for weeping. It is not the time for proudly boasting, “I would never do what he did.” It is a time for humbling acknowledging that “but for the grace of God there go I.”

We can not change what has happened. We can not undo the past – our own or anyone else’s. Of course, wherein we have sinned, we can and we must repent, making sure that we “bring forth . . . fruits meet for repentance” (Matt. 3:8). But something has to be done to stem the tide of those gospel preachers (and elders) who are getting caught up in the whirlpool of marital infidelity!

What Can Be Done?

Any recommended list of “dos” and “don’ts” has to be incomplete. Space is insufficient to discuss every item which could be considered in an attempt to both respect the sanctity of the home and to prevent martial infidelity. Nor is any claim being made that the items herein suggested are listed in the order of greatest importance. The writer does, however, claim that the following recommendations are important and that, if followed, they would drastically reduce the number of marriages that are falling apart.

1. Let preachers in particular recognize in advance that caution must be exercised lest they are inadvertently placed in precarious situations. It is easy to over sympathize with that “sweet young thing” whose husband is a brute and who shows her no attention whatever especially if the preacher sees her alone in his office or alone at her home (a foolish mistake!). A preacher should be aware of the fact that sooner or later some person in the audience will, for various reasons, become attracted to him, and maybe even fantasize in her mind of romantic encounters with him. And such a person may become overly friendly with him, even to the point of being flirty. Every preacher should learn to entreat “the elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity” (1 Tim. 5:2). By all means, “keep thyself pure” (1 Tim. 5:22)!

2. Let preachers and their wives be honest with each other. Both of them possess needs and desires which can scripturally be satisfied within the marriage relationship (Heb. 13:4). And temptation is likely to arise if those needs are not met. If in order “to avoid fornication” every man should have his own wife and every woman her own husband (1 Cor. 7:2), then for the same reason the husband should “render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto her husband” (1 Cor. 7:3). To deliberately withhold one’s self from one’s mate is to “defraud” that person (1 Cor. 7:5). But of more serious consequence, it will render that defrauded mate more vulnerable to temptation when another person of the opposite sex gets a little too friendly. Of course, we would not suggest that only the sexual needs must be met. Love, concern, support, protection, etc., must also be mutually demonstrated.

3. Let preachers teach themselves when they teach others. The Jewish leaders regarded themselves as the true teachers of the law, the real keepers of orthodoxy. Yet Paul found it necessary to ask these sobering questions: “Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, doest thou commit adultery? thou that abhorest idols, doest thou commit sacrilege?” (Rom. 2:21,22). In brief, they were not personally absorbing the very truths they taught others. Hence “through” them the name of God was “blasphemed among the Gentiles” (Rom. 2:24). And His glorious Name is still being “blasphemed” among sinners through those preachers who preach one thing and practice another. We must distinguish between the possession of true godliness and merely possessing the “form of godliness” (2 Tim. 3:5). There is a difference!

4. Let preachers maintain their personal devotions. To put it tersely: too many preachers are suffering from too much TV and too little prayer! TV itself is not inherently evil, but a lot of TV programs are! A steady diet of profanity, drinking, murder, homosexuality, adultery, and nudity piped in for one’s own private viewing and hearing is bound to take its toll. Though we (in our own way of thinking) would never do such things, we do become affected by such programs, for we are gradually conditioned to cease being either shocked by or outraged against such grievous sins against God, especially if we neglect to spend much time in studying for personal benefit (not just for sermons), and if we neglect to spend much time in prayer. Without trying to sound like the so-called Pentecostal people, let it be understood that each of us needs our own prayer “closet” (Matt. 6:6), or some place where we can commune privately with God in prayer. On one occasion, Jesus rose “up a great while before day, . . . and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed” (Mark 1:35). On another occasion “he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in praycr to God” (Luke 6:12). At the time when Jesus was “transfigured before” Peter, James, and John, He was praying (Matt. 17:1,2; Luke 9:28,29). The point is this: Jesus, who “did no sin” (1 Pet. 2:22) and who had a busy schedule, spent much time in prayer. Hence, can we, who have sinned (Rom. 3:23) and who do sin (1 John 1:8), afford to be negligent in prayer? A character study of those great servants of God (both in the Old and New Testaments), who withstood in describable hardships and temptation and accomplished much in the service of God, reveals one thing they nearly all had in common – they zealously and regularly carried their concerns unto God in prayer. Could it be that we who sought to “fight the good fight of faith” (1 Tim. 6:12) have tried to wage this fight without petitioning God for His help?

Conduslon

More, much more, could be written by way of encouraging preachers to cleanse themselves “from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2 Cor. 7:1). Our conduct at all times should be such as “becometh the gospel of Christ” (Phil. 1:27). Whether we like it or not, we do figuratively “live in glass houses.” For good or bad, much is at stake with regards to our own manner of life. For the benefit of others whom we influence, for the sake of our families, and our own eternal well being, let us be “an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity” (1 Tim. 4:12). The temporal and the eternal stakes are simply too high for us to do otherwise.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 1, pp. 6-7
January 5, 1984