Truth Magazine

By Olen Holderby

This is my assigned subject for this special issue; and, I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these very important topics. I begin by borrowing a statement from Jesus that says, “The last shall be first, and the first last . . .”; for, this appears to be the best approach in studying these topics together.

Moral Issues

Neither word has found place in our English translation of the Gospel; but both words have some close relatives there, and are normally understood. Webster de-fines the word “moral” (adj.) as “conforming to a standard of what is right and good.” The word “is-sues,” while found in the Scripture, it is not there in the sense we normally use it. One comment which Webster makes on this word is “point of controversy.” Perhaps this is enough to set the stage for what we wish to say.

Let us first identify these moral issues. Galatians 5:19-20 is the first list that comes to mind: Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, “and such like.” Paul’s “such like” seems to include all others mentioned in the Scriptures (Rom. 1; Col. 3; 1 Cor. 5, 6, etc.). Some of these moral issues are not so easily identified: hatred, covetousness, envy, malice, etc. Others, of course, are more easily recognized: Drinking, gambling, unscriptural marriages, murder, etc.

There is a fixed standard of “what is right and good” by which these things are to be governed. That standard is, of course, the “perfect law of liberty” (James 1:25; Phil. 1:27). Jesus demanded a higher standard in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:20). It appears that every time society lowers the standard, many in the church wish to do the same thing; and this is where/when moral issues become a battle-ground. God does not change (Mal. 3:6); Jesus does not change (Heb. 13:8); and, his law by which we are to live does not change. It cannot do so if it is the “perfect law of liberty.” I fail to see the difficulty in understanding these simple facts, or the application to moral issues.

The moral issues over which controversy is raging today are: divorce and remarriage problems, drinking of intoxicants, gambling, dancing, and homosexuality; at least this is so in my part of the country. The problems here are not to be assigned to a lack of plainness of the Scripture; rather, it seems to be a desire to lower that perfect standard. Compromising that standard cannot accomplish any-thing good. Jesus has plainly stated the only cause for divorce, and the ones who have a right to remarry (Matt. 5:32; 19:9). Any deviation from this is a lowering of the standard. The same can be said of other moral issues. In the final analysis the question would appear to be 

What is our attitude toward the standard given by the Lord? Having said these things, we are ready for the second part of our article.

Discipline

Webster defines this word as, “Treatment suited to a disciple or learner; educational training, drill; subjection to rule; severe training, instruction, chastisement, correction.”

From this definition, we can easily see that discipline is both preventive and corrective.

All church-related discipline has a two-fold purpose: (1) . To save souls (James 5:20; Gal.6:1), (2) To protect the purity of the church (Eph. 5:25-27; 1 Cor. 5:6). If, for some reason, we cannot save the soul, we can protect the purity of the church, and this must be done.

Preventive discipline has to do with instructions or teaching (Acts 20:28-30; Tit. 2:11-12; Phil. 1:27; Col. 1:28; 2 John 9-11). Proper teaching will deal with these moral is-sues, hopefully preventing people from participating therein. This stresses the importance of the local teaching program; such programs should be designed to include strong teaching on the moral issues.

Corrective discipline has to do with seeing to it that all members of a local church follow the gospel or suffer the consequences. This is punishing in nature; but, it is frequently necessary. Corrective discipline begins with the effort(s) to restore the guilty to a proper relationship to the Lord (Gal. 6:1; Tit. 3:10-11); we do this in meekness and love. The fact that such people are separated from God, in a lost condition, destined to eternal torment, clearly shows the urgency of such efforts.

The immoral man of 1 Corinthians 5 was to be disciplined, the disorderly of 2 Thessalonians 3 were to be disciplined, the false teacher of Romans 16:17 was to be disciplined, and the heretic of Titus 3 was to be disciplined. Any person persisting in or continuing in sin must be disciplined.

Discipline, whether preventive or corrective is for our own good (Heb. 12:4-11). When practiced, corrective discipline is never pleasant or joyous; it fact it is grievous. But, it “yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.” Such discipline has its place even in private offenses (Matt. 5:22-24; 18:15-17), and it must be practised without respect of persons (James 2:9). This brings us to the third part of our study.

Fellowship

We come into fellowship with the Father and the Son through the agency of their word (1 John 1:3); and, that fellowship is maintained exactly the same way (1 Cor. 4:6; 2 John 9-11).

In the context of our study, the word “fellowship” has to do with relationship. Exactly what is our relationship to the one who has been disciplined? How do we treat them? What association are we allowed with them? The answer to these and other questions may be had through a study of some passages involved.

Romans 16:17, says that we are to “mark” the false teach-ers and to “avoid them.” To avoid is to “turn away from” and “to turn aside” (Vine). How can we avoid anyone by planning to be with them? This provides some response to our questions.

In reference to the immoral man of 1 Corinthians 5, we are told six things to do: Put away, judge them, with such a one don’t eat, not to company with, purge out, and deliver such a one unto Satan. The word “company” (sunanamignumi) is defined by Vine as, “to mix, mingle, to have or keep company with.” Does not this reflect upon the answers to our questions?

More proding for our answers may be found in 2 Thessalonians 3:6,14-15. We are to “Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly. . .”; and, we are to “have no company with him.” Yet, Paul here says, “Count him not as an enemy; but admonish him as a brother.” To admonish anyone is to both instruct and to warn. This would appear to specify the limited contact which we may have with the one who has been disciplined.

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11). This is an obvious command, in fact two commands: (1) Have no fellowship with, and (2) Reprove them. Beck’s translation says, “Don’t have anything to do with.” To “reprove them” may make it a necessity to be with them; but, this contact would need to be for the purpose of reproving them. Thus, again, limits are drawn for us. When we make an effort to fellow-ship those who have no fellowship with God, we become “partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 11)

We need to “continue sted fastly” in the apostles’ fellow-ship (Acts 2:42); yet, we must not forget that, “If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth” (1 John 1:6). On the other hand, “if we walk in the light, . . . we have fellowship one with an-other.” This most certainly is true where moral issues are concerned! May each of our lives be such, morally, that the standard will be held above the filth and scum of the world. To that extent, we may be able to say with Paul, “Christ liveth in me” (Gal.2:20).

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 13, p. 28-29
July 4, 1996

By Don Bradford

Perhaps the first error we should address is the first one we usually ignore. It would seem that far more thought and time is given to planning the wedding ceremony than is given to the marriage itself. This must be reversed.

Marriage is looked forward to by almost all of us from an early age. Most of us become anxious to be in the relationship far before we are ready for it. If parents are like mine were, too little introduction and instruction is given concerning marriage and its responsibilities. It would seem that they assumed that when the time came, I would know all I needed to know about marriage by the rules of human instinct. This assumption was not correct then, it is not correct today!

So many people enter into marriage only to soon break the relationship. The last time I heard anything on this, it was said about half of those married soon looked to divorce. Many of our youngsters (and some not so young) tend to lose that which they thought they had in common before marriage and begin to feel regret that they are so bound. With so many people being divorced, it is easy for them to assume that divorce is the way out and they begin to look for a new beginning. Whether or not God is considered is debatable. Most of the time he is not! We concentrate on our problem and forget that we are in subjection to the Higher Power who could help us with our problem if we would seek his help (1 Cor.10:13; Phil. 4:13). We want relief from our problem.

The solution to the problem is for parents, preachers, teachers, and church members in general to come to a recognition of what God has ordained and enforce that understanding. Selfishness is at the root of almost every hasty marriage and most divorces. We want things our way, or else! Discipline of self along the lines of God’s instructions regarding marriage, its purpose, and its goal are absolutely essential. One of the big problems is that too many people (including church members) have little, or no knowledge of what God has ordained on these matters and depend upon what others tell them. This is fatal!

We, individually, bear responsibility. Gone are the dayswhen society accepts the fact of parents making the marriage arrangements. We must learn and be prepared to act on our own responsibility and be ready to accept the consequences of our mistakes, if they be there. We must know that God in the beginning ordained that, when we come to that time in life, we should leave our parents and must cling to the one we choose as our mate. That is the rule for today! There is a permanency to this action that we must accept. Too, we have to learn and accept the fact that when we do what we, individually, can do, God does something we can-not do  God joins the two and they become one flesh. This must be recognized! What we hear Jesus teaching in Matthew 19:1-12 is exactly what God ordained in Genesis 2:24. Jesus tells us that the foolishness of man caused God to allow Moses to relent on his former determination, but that is not the way it was from the beginning! Then Jesus voices what his dictate is on the matter.

Too few of us recognize that when we came into this world we did so by the grace and benevolence of our God (Gen. 48:9; Eccl. 12:7). We had absolutely nothing to do with the matter. So it is when we give ourselves into a marriage relationship. We only join ourselves to our mate. God makes us “one flesh. ” There is nothing we can do about it. God’s action comes with the territory!

We must teach these things to our children! We must observe these God-given rules!

Every relationship has its own risks  marriage, child birth, etc. We need to learn that everything is not going to be the “rose garden” that we would like it to be. The best planned marriage can go wrong. That child we so anxiously looked forward to can turn out to be a complete disappointment (Deut. 21:18-21).When these things happen there is no way we can throw up our hands and quit. We have to make up our minds that we are going to make the best of things. It is said that when we are given lemons we should make lemonade. Even after some fifty-four years of marriage, I get angry with my wife. But, I remember that Paul covers that problem in Ephesians 4:26-27. Should I obey God, or give in to what I would like to do  run away from the problem? To those wives whose husbands ran out on them as suggested in 1 Corinthians 7, instructions given to them said that even though things did not work out as planned, they were responsible to “keep the home fires burning” and not give up.

Frequently it would seem that to many changing mates is little different from changing coats. Perhaps a husband has been guilty of sexual sin with another woman. Some years later is the wife justified by God to use that historical event as grounds for divorcing him? How has she been able to put up with him and his sin for all the ensuing years? Could it be that the wife suddenly sees another man she thinks she would like to have and uses the historical event as an excuse to put the old husband away? Are we aware that God tells us that only the innocent party may put away his/her mate and remarry? It would seem that this area is not often considered.

Too often we find church members who should know better giving sympathy to and attempting to justify a second marriage after the first marriage has gone awry. Was the divorce predicated on a God-accepted reason? Many times it is not. When it is suggested that the second marriage is not accepted by God, defense is established to justify the new, and sinful, relationship. Where is our love for God, his instructions and the former relationship? What are our feelings regarding the woman God still considers the wife of the “newly married man”? What about the children of that relationship? Without a God-approved reason for divorce, the divorced woman is still the man’s wife. The “joining” made by God continues regardless of what civil courts and/or the participants think they have done.

See Mark 6:17. As John, the Baptizer, spoke the mind of God, he instructed Herod that he was married to a woman who was not really his wife  she still belonged to the man she thought she had divorced. How often does this happen today among church members and/or in our society?

Advocates of the liberalization of divorce among members of the church are now making new definition to words. Jesus tells us that except for the reason of fornication (or adultery) one who is married cannot put away his/her mate. So, to some unlearned and gullible people, adultery now means something other than sexual relations with one not his/her mate. To some, adultery now means the action of divorcing the first mate and marrying the second mate. This definition cannot be found in any recognized Greek Lexicon, but it is being advocated and the claim is made that Jesus gave us the definition in Matthew 19:9.

Others make claim that adultery is a “one-time” thing and the continued living together with the associated sexual relationship is not a continuation of the adulterous relationship.

We would find it interesting to use the definition of the word instead of the word itself when reading Bible pas-sages having to do with the subject. Such should remind us of Peter’s statement, 2 Peter 3:16 “. . . His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction” (NIV).

Sixty years ago divorce and remarriage was scorned by almost everyone. Today the inroads made by Satan are so great that not only insult is come upon the church of our Lord, but the injury is beyond our ability to comprehend because of divorce and remarriage among members. A few years ago a preacher from an institutional congregation asked me why there were more divorces and remarriages among “my” group than “his.” I could not answer, but what he believed does seem to be true from what I have heard, and this is a shame if it be fact! Until people in the church are willing to “take their heads out of the sand” and study the subject together there will be division among us unto our condemnation per 1 Corinthians 1:10, and other pas-sages. Until church members come to the point in their conversion where they determine to live according to the dictates of Scriptures, we are going to experience difficulties and heartbreak because of divorce and remarriage among our spiritual family.

Unless we in the church do away with the A.C.L.U. attitude that seems to be developing in the church we will never be able to overcome the problems of marriage, divorce and remarriage, or any other which has an impact sufficient to separate the brethren. May the God of heaven be merciful to his people.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 13, p. 26-27
July 4, 1996

By Jim McDonald

Sometimes I hear criticism that most letters from the Philippines are requests for help. I am sure that is true. Most Filipinos regard us here in the States as rich and frankly, compared with them, we are. One trip to their is-lands ought to melt even the most hardened of hearts as one drives from the capital into the remote provincial villages and views their humble homes, sees their daily fare of food, meager supply of clothes, poor furniture and their scrounging to acquire even 32 cents to mail a letter to the U.S. We are rich, and to Filipino brethren whose lives are so devoid of hope we are their only link with hope. The following excerpt is taken from the letter of a Filipino friend, brother and preacher. “Sometimes I have the feeling to be ashamed of begging help but our situation force me to do. This is the only way to survive, to be a beggar.”

I am sure the blind beggar of John 9 did not present a very pretty sight to Jesus’ disciples when they came in contact with him. They wondered whether his blindness was the result of his sin or that of his parents. Likely the lame man of Acts 3 was not a wholesome picture when Peter and John went into the temple at the hour of prayer. It is possible that sight of him “turned some folks off’ just as the wounded and bruised Jew of Luke 10 “turned off ” the priest and Levite. The beggar Lazarus was a miser-able, wretched specimen of humanity, laid as he were at the gates of the rich man  full of sores, which the dogs licked. But, he was God’s child (Luke 16).

The plight of our brethren in the Philippines (and Africa, Nigeria and India) is not in most instances a result of their own making. Droughts, floods, and economy are factors beyond their control. Most of these do not fit into the category of “working not at all, but are busybodies.” Brethren in these areas are caught in a web of circumstances beyond their control and so the plea for help  begging, if we want to call it that. There may be some unworthy souls among them whose status in life is all together that of their own making who just might be helped by some unsuspecting U.S. brother. So what? Will his hypocrisy make the sincerely given gift a sin? Shall we help none lest we help some who do not deserve our help?

We cannot feed the world. Can we help all our impoverished brethren? Can we help some of them? Should we even try? Somehow I am under the impression our Savior said, “To do good and to communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.” “As we have opportunity, let us work that which is good toward all men, especially toward those of the household of faith.” “In love of the brethren be ye tenderly affectioned one toward an-other, in honor preferring one another.” “And let our people learn to maintain good work for necessary uses.” “Pure religion and undefiled before our God and the Father is this to visit the fatherless and the widows in their afflictions and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.” “What doth it profit my brother, if a man say he hath faith and hath not works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked and in lack of daily food and one of you say unto him, go in peace, be ye warmed and filled and yet ye give them not the things needful for the body, what doth it profit?” “My little children, let us not love in word, neither with the tongue, but in deed and in truth” (Heb. 13:16; Gal. 6:10; Rom. 12:10; Titus 3:14; James 1:26f; 2:14-16; 1 John 3:18).

Be grateful you live in the land of plenty you do. Be grateful things are as well with you as they are. And never forget that our Lord said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” Your state could be the same as theirs. Do they like to “beg”? I think not. But to whom else may they turn? Helping our unfortunate brethren brings a far greater blessing to us than them. Dare we forget that Jesus said “Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these, my brethren, ye did it unto me”? (Matt. 25:40).

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 14, p. 11
July 18, 1996

Sometimes I hear criticism that most letters from the Philippines are requests for help. I am sure that is true. Most Filipinos regard us here in the States as rich and frankly, compared with them, we are. One trip to their is-lands ought to melt even the most hardened of hearts as one drives from the capital into the remote provincial villages and views their humble homes, sees their daily fare of food, meager supply of clothes, poor furniture and their scrounging to acquire even 32 cents to mail a letter to the U.S. We are rich, and to Filipino brethren whose lives are so devoid of hope we are their only link with hope. The following excerpt is taken from the letter of a Filipino friend, brother and preacher. “Sometimes I have the feeling to be ashamed of begging help but our situation force me to do. This is the only way to survive, to be a beggar.”

I am sure the blind beggar of John 9 did not present a very pretty sight to Jesus’ disciples when they came in contact with him. They wondered whether his blindness was the result of his sin or that of his parents. Likely the lame man of Acts 3 was not a wholesome picture when Peter and John went into the temple at the hour of prayer. It is possible that sight of him “turned some folks off’ just as the wounded and bruised Jew of Luke 10 “turned off ” the priest and Levite. The beggar Lazarus was a miser-able, wretched specimen of humanity, laid as he were at the gates of the rich man  full of sores, which the dogs licked. But, he was God’s child (Luke 16).

The plight of our brethren in the Philippines (and Africa, Nigeria and India) is not in most instances a result of their own making. Droughts, floods, and economy are factors beyond their control. Most of these do not fit into the category of “working not at all, but are busybodies.” Brethren in these areas are caught in a web of circumstances beyond their control and so the plea for help  begging, if we want to call it that. There may be some unworthy souls among them whose status in life is all together that of their own making who just might be helped by some unsuspecting U.S. brother. So what? Will his hypocrisy make the sincerely given gift a sin? Shall we help none lest we help some who do not deserve our help?

We cannot feed the world. Can we help all our impoverished brethren? Can we help some of them? Should we even try? Somehow I am under the impression our Savior said, “To do good and to communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.” “As we have opportunity, let us work that which is good toward all men, especially toward those of the household of faith.” “In love of the brethren be ye tenderly affectioned one toward an-other, in honor preferring one another.” “And let our people learn to maintain good work for necessary uses.” “Pure religion and undefiled before our God and the Father is this to visit the fatherless and the widows in their afflictions and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.” “What doth it profit my brother, if a man say he hath faith and hath not works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked and in lack of daily food and one of you say unto him, go in peace, be ye warmed and filled and yet ye give them not the things needful for the body, what doth it profit?” “My little children, let us not love in word, neither with the tongue, but in deed and in truth” (Heb. 13:16; Gal. 6:10; Rom. 12:10; Titus 3:14; James 1:26f; 2:14-16; 1 John 3:18).

Be grateful you live in the land of plenty you do. Be grateful things are as well with you as they are. And never forget that our Lord said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” Your state could be the same as theirs. Do they like to “beg”? I think not. But to whom else may they turn? Helping our unfortunate brethren brings a far greater blessing to us than them. Dare we forget that Jesus said “Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these, my brethren, ye did it unto me”? (Matt. 25:40).

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 14, p. 11
July 18, 1996

By Ken Leach

So the brotherhood is looking for gospel preachers are they? (see “A Number of Churches, Large and Small Are Now Looking for Preachers,” Guardian of Truth, May 16, 1996 article by H E. Phillips.) I doubt that!

What if I could find a gospel preacher that has been unsuccessfully looking for a congregation to work with for over a year? Well, you say, maybe this gospel preacher isn’t a good enough speaker. I respond that he was recently asked to present an evening lecture at Florida College and did very well according to hundreds who heard him preach. Well, maybe he is one of those preachers who moves around too much. I respond that he is still working for the same congregation he was working with five years ago. Well, maybe he is one of those preachers who has never done anything but preach and cannot relate to the “real world.” I respond that this man was head of communication for a very large firm (the U.S. Navy) from which he retired after twenty years.

Well, maybe he isn’t very good at personal work. I respond that this man, when holding a gospel meeting in Tennessee, went to the town a couple of days early (on his own volition), knocked on doors, invited people to the meeting, asked for home Bible studies and baptized a couple from that effort during the three-day meeting. How long has it been since you heard of something like that?

Well, maybe this man doesn’t have the kind of wife and family that a gospel preacher needs to be effective. I respond that this man served as a qualified deacon of the church and his wife is one of the most godly women I have ever met. One of his daughters attended Florida College and another is in high school. Both are Christians. Well, maybe this man is demanding too much money or is too restricted to a certain part of the country. I respond that this man has a retirement income, is willing to work at a part-time job when things get tight and has never demanded anything in the way of money from anybody. He isn’t restricted geographically to anywhere. Well, maybe this man can’t relate to the young people of a congregation. I respond that this man is a favorite of young people and is very social.

Well, maybe this man is one of those preachers who likes to “run the show” and would be difficult to deal with from the standpoint of an eldership. I respond that the reason this man would like to relocate is so he can work with an eldership. He believes the preacher has enough to do without having to do the work of an elder. Well, maybe this man is so old he has one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. I respond that this gospel preacher is about 50 and in perfect health as is his family.

Well, if all this is true, this man must be holding some silly position on an “issue.” I respond that this preacher stands firm on immodest apparel (he refused a job where the church didn’t want someone that couldn’t put up with a “little immodesty” whatever that is), he preaches the “plain vanilla” truth on divorce and remarriage, he believes Jesus Christ was 100% man and 100% deity while on the earth, he teaches that one must repent to receive forgiveness of sins, he doesn’t stand for the “unity in diversity” error or any of the other “wrong” positions talked about these days.

This gospel preacher has asked some “pillars of the church” about congregations that are “looking for preachers.” He has been told that, in all honesty, he probably just wouldn’t work out at most of those places. This gospel preacher has gone to some congregations and preached in hopes of being offered the job. It hasn’t “worked out.”

By now you must either think I am lying, have some bad information, or am crazy. I am none of these things. Why then would such a man have such a hard time finding a congregation to work with? It seems like there would be a line at his doorstep.

My gospel preacher friend is black. Wonder if that has anything to do with it?

I deny that there are “a number of churches, large and small, now looking for preachers.” There well may be a number of churches looking for white preachers. Maybe we should consider the racial prejudice log in our own eye before standing condemned at judgment. It takes more than talking a good game about loving one another to be pleasing to the King. We shall be known by our fruits.

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 14, p. 10
July 18, 1996