Truth Magazine

By Ferrell Jenkins

On the fourth day we left Adiyaman and headed south-easterly on highway 875 to Sanliurfa and Harran. The road isn’t even on a map I bought about 10 years ago. We were able to see Mount Nemrud in the distant mountains about 35 to 40 miles away. We saw the lakes that have been formed as a result of GAP; in English this acronym stands for the Southeastern Anatolian Project. When completed in 1997 the project will consist of 22 dams on the upper Euphrates. Already the water is providing electrical power and irrigation water for the dry southeastern portion of Turkey. A large tunnel takes water to Harran and the Mesopotamian plain. Lack of water is a big problem in the Middle East and this project is a source of concern to Syria and Iraq because they depend on the Euphrates for water.

The River Euphrates:

Boundary of the Promised Land

We were excited to see the Euphrates River. A drive of about one-half mile east of the highway brought us to the southernmost dam of the water conservation project. The river is wider than I had imagined it would be here. The water is clear and some fish can be seen jumping. I have seen the Euphrates at Nasiriyah near the traditional site of Ur of the Chaldees north of the Persian Gulf in Iraq. There the river is wider, deeper and contains more mud. The Euphrates is called the Firat in the Turkish language.

The Euphrates is the largest, longest, and most important river of Western Asia. It is nearly 1800 miles long and was the boundary of the land promised to Abraham (Gen. 15:18). The empires of Assyria and Babylon, the greatest enemies of Israel, lived east of the Euphrates. The prophets often put the Euphrates by metonymy for these countries to designate the place from which the punishment of God would come (Isa. 7:20; 8:7; Jer. 46:10). In the book of Revelation the Euphrates is dried up so that the kings of the east can gather at a place called Armageddon (16:12-16). When Revelation was written the Parthians, dreaded enemy of Rome, lived east of the Euphrates. The Assyrian king Shalmaneser III (858-824 B.C.) mentions frequently in his records that he had crossed the river Euphrates. In one of his annals he says he had crossed the Euphrates twenty-one times (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 279-80). That means war! For more details see my Studies in the Book of Revelation, 39.)

South of the highway we visited a typical village of the area with mud-brick houses, piles of stored grain, stacks of dung cakes which were being dried for cooking and warming the houses during the winter. Along the river there were flocks of sheep and goats and two horses. While I was photographing the scene, a young woman came to the river with two buckets to get water for her house. As she walked out in the water I focused my camera on her and she turned her back and then walked back toward her house leaving her buckets behind. We realized that life styles had changed little in the past four thousand years.

As we continued toward Sanliurfa we saw some people winnowing lentils in one of the villages; they had already winnowed some wheat. They gladly went through all of the stages of the process for us to photograph.

Most of the people we talked with from Sanliurfa east-ward stated they were Kurdish  not Turkish. This is an ethnic problem for Turkey which is outside the interest of this article.

Sanliurfa: Birthplace of Abraham?

When we arrived in Sanliurfa, with a population of 276,000, I told Curtis and Kyle that here they were seeing the thoroughly oriental Middle East that I have known for more than a quarter of a century. The culture, the dress of the people, the streets, and the markets remind me of Damascus, Antioch of Syria, Amman, and Jerusalem before Israeli modernization. Yet the city has a modern touch, too. It is the home of Harran University. The name Sanliurfa means “Glorious Urfa,” but the town is often called Urfa.

Many Moslem pilgrims come to Urfa to visit a cave where it is believed Abraham was born. Some have equated Urfa with the Ur of the Chaldeans of the Bible (Gen. 11:28, et al.). Ur may not equal Urfa but a fairly good case can be made for placing the Biblical Ur in the northern sectors of Mesopotamia, rather than the traditional Ur in ancient Sumer. For more information see The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands, 80, and International Standard Bible Encyclopedia IV:954-5.

We visited the Cave of Abraham and saw the pilgrims worshipping there and drinking the water which flows from the spring in the cave. We also visited the nice museum which contains many items from the Bronze Age, including the period of the biblical patriarchs. One of the most impressive items is the stele from Harran of Nabonidus, the last ruler of the Neo-Babylonian empire (556-539 B.C.). Nabonidus was king of Babylon when Daniel was made third in the kingdom [after Belshazzar, son of Nabonidus] (Dan. 5:7).

The earliest name for Urfa was Ursu. During the Seleucid period, about 300 B.C., it was named Edessa. Here Crassus and the Roman army were defeated by the Parthians in 53 B.C. Trajan visited the city in A.D. 114. Edessa became a strong center of Christianity during the third century A.D.

Harran: Home of Abraham

Driving twenty miles south to Harran (spelled Haran in many English versions of the Bible) we knew we were in Mesopotamia, the Greek name meaning the land between the rivers (Euphrates and Tigris). In the Hebrew this territory was called Aram-naharaim, “Aram of the two rivers” (Gen. 24:10; Deut. 23:4; the NASB has Mesopotamia). This term may apply only to the area between the Euphrates and the Balih rivers, also known as Paddan-aram  “field of Aram”  in the Bible. The region is part of the wet steppe of Mesopotamia which receives about 12 inches of rainfall annually. It is part of what has been called the “Fertile Crescent,” primarily in contrast with the arid desert which surrounds it (The Moody Atlas of the Bible, 7).

The Genesis record tells us that Terah and his family, including Abraham and Sarah, left Ur of the Chaldeans “in order to enter the land of Canaan; and they went as far as Haran, and settled there” (Gen. 11:31). After the death of Terah, Abraham and Sarah continued south to the land of Canaan. Genesis 12:5 indicates that the time spent in Harran was one of prosperity for Abraham. See also Acts 7:2-4.

Paddan-aram was the home of Laban, the brother of Sarah (Gen. 28:2). Rebekah came from this region to be the wife of Isaac (Gen. 24-25) and Jacob spent many years in the area working for Leah and Rachel (Gen. 28ff). All of his children except Benjamin were born here (Gen. 29:32 – 30:24): The Israelites were able to say, “My father was a wandering Aramean” (Deut. 26:5; Syrian,.KJV). The life we see in the area today is reminiscent of the events recorded in Genesis. The women wear colorful costumes even when working in the field or getting water at the well (now re-placed by the running water at one place in the village). Wells supplied the necessary water in Patriarchal times (Gen. 24:11; 29:2).

Harran is mentioned in texts as early as 2000 B.C. as the location of a temple of Sin, the moon-god. Assyria maintained a presence here from the 14th century B.C. The city rebelled against Assyria in 763 B.C. and was sacked (New Bible Dictionary, 453). Sennacherib used this fact to intimidate the Judeans (2 Kings 19:12, Isa. 37:12). After Nineveh fell in 612 B.C., the Assyrians maintained their capital at Harran until 609 B.C. when the city was captured by the Babylonians. Ezekiel, in prophesying against Tyre, mentions the trade with Harran (Ezek. 27:23).

Before reaching the Syrian border we turned east and headed straight for the mound of ancient Harran. Ruins of the oldest mosque in Turkey, from the 8th century A.D., stand on the tell, as do ruins from the time of Saladin (A.D. 1192) and the time of the Crusaders. Ruins of the famous Moslem university are also visible. Harran has a population of about 2300 persons today. Many of them live in beehive or conical-shaped houses. It is said that these houses are warm in winter and cool in summer. Throughout our journey in eastern Turkey we marveled at the way man is able to adapt to his environment and utilize the local material to provide housing.

Everything we saw in Harran was interesting, but it was the association with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that drew us here. We got a little feel for the place they lived for so many years. In a way this was our ancestral home: “And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (Gal. 3:29).

More adventure to come. The Tigris River, the land of Urartu (Ararat), and Mount Ararat.

Guardian of Truth XL: 7 p. 10-11
April 4, 1996

Now it came to pass that a group existed that called themselves fishermen and there were many fish in the waters about them. In fact, the whole area was surrounded by streams and lakes and the fish were hungry. Week after week and month after month and year after year the group that called themselves “fishermen” met in meetings and talked about those called to fish, the abundance of fish, and how we might go about fishing. Year after year they carefully defined what fishing meant, defending fishing as an occupation, and declared that fishing be the primary talk of fishermen. These fishermen built large beautiful buildings for local fishing headquarters and their plea was that everyone should be a fisherman and that everyone should fish. However, the one thing they did not do, they did not fish!

In addition to meeting regularly these men determined to send out fishermen to places where there were many fish. This sending committee was headed by those who had great vision and had courage to speak about fishing and to promote the idea of fishing in far away streams and lakes where many other fish of different colors lived. They hired staff and held many meetings to define fishing, to defend fishing, and to decide what new streams should be thought about. But one thing the staff and the committee members did not do, they did not fish!

Large, elaborate training centers were built whose original and primary purpose was to teach fishermen how to fish. Over the years courses were offered on the needs of fish, the nature of fish, how to find fish, and the psychological effects of fishing. Those who taught had Doctorates in “Fisheology.” But the teachers did not fish! They only taught about fishing.

Further, the fishermen built large printing houses to publish fishing guides. Presses were kept busy day and night to produce material solely devoted to fishing methods. A speakers bureau was also organized to schedule special speakers on fishing. After one stirring meeting entitled “The Necessity of Fishing,” two young men left the meeting and actually went fishing and one of them actually caught two fish! He was honored for his great catch and was scheduled to appear at all the big meetings to tell how he did it. So he quit fishing in order to have the time to tell his experiences to the other fishermen.

Now it is true that many of the fishermen sacrificed and put up with all kinds of difficulties. Some lived near the water and had to put up with the smell of dead fish. Some had to endure the ridicule of some who made fun of these fishermen’s clubs because they claimed to be fishermen but they did not fish.

And they wondered about those who thought it was of little use to attend meetings and talk about fishing. I mean, after all, were they not following the Master who said, “Come and I will make you fishers of men”? Imagine their chagrin when someone actually suggested that they were not really “fishermen.” Yet it did make sense. Can we rightfully call a person a fisherman if year after year he never catches a fish?

Can a person really be following Jesus if he is not fishing?

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 16, p. 25
August 15, 1996

By Steve Wallace

Many of us have probably been to a funeral where an unsaved person was “preached into heaven.” By this we usually mean that, at the service for the deceased, a denominational “Pastor” or “Reverend” spoke of how the person had somehow come into a saved state shortly before death or spoke of them as if they were now in heaven. There are several lessons that the living can learn from such events.

1. One must act one’s own behalf to get to heaven. The preacher or teacher’s work is to exhort others to “save them-selves” or “repent” (Acts 2:40; 8:22). Christians should be good examples and “shine as lights in the world” (Phil. 2:15). However, the lost person also has something to do. If he has never come to Christ, he must hear the gospel, believe it, repent of his sins, confess Christ as the Son of God and be baptized for the remission of sins (Mark 16:15-16; Rom. 10:9-10; Acts 2:38). If an individual has once become a Christian and then later fallen away, such a one must repent and pray to God (Acts 8:22; 2 Cor. 7:10). If such people do not act in obedience to Christ’s word it is meaningless to “preach them into heaven” after they die. (It is equally meaningless to try to “fellowship an erring brother into heaven”!) The lost and erring must come out of their sinful state.

2. “Care giving” at the expense of preaching the gospel. In my opinion, one of the main reasons behind the practice of preaching the unsaved dead into heaven is obvious: It is to comfort the grieving loved ones of the deceased. Such sermons are designed to show sympathy and care to those who remain behind. While God’s people are told to “weep with them that weep” (Rom. 12:15), the practice under discussion is obviously an extreme we must avoid. Many a gospel preacher has used the opportunity of preaching someone’s funeral to teach the truth to those who might otherwise not hear it. While not neglecting the comfort and consolation found in the word of God (2 Cor. 1:3-6), the preacher must balance his preaching to meet the spiritual needs of his listeners (2 Tim. 4:2). The main aim of a sermon should always be to bring people closer to the Lord. If we change the focus of our preaching to that of “care giving” or making people feel good, we will have to come up with another message (Gal. 1:9), just like the denominational preachers do when they “preach the lost into heaven.” It is this writer’s conviction that the current trend of preaching lessons which lean heavily on human psychology or books on counseling for their support is a manifestation of this problem (2 Tim. 4:4).

3. Feigned love. The Christian is to love without dissimulation or falseness (Rom. 12:9; 2 Cor. 6:6). An obvious question arises with regards to the one who would claim to be a Christian and then try to preach a lost person into heaven: Is this really showing love for lost souls? Who benefits from his message? Neither the living or the dead. But he seems so loving as he stands there putting forth his message! Though most such preachers may be unaware of it, they are not showing true love to anyone in “preaching the lost into heaven.” Using opportunities given us for “speaking the truth in love” will help us avoid such false displays of affection (Eph. 4:15).

Conclusion

Helping others get to heaven involves instructing them in the ways of righteousness and encouraging them in that way (e.g., Acts 2:38-40). If we are truly concerned about the needs of our audiences we will base our message to them on what the Bible says about their state and needs, and encourage them to apply God’s word to their lives.

Guardian of Truth XL: 7 p. 19
April 4, 1996

By Ron Halbrook

And Abram said unto Lot, “Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren” (Gen. 13:8). “Behold, how good and how pleas-ant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!” (Ps. 133:1).

Fervent, sincere appeals for unity based upon truth are always in order, but false teachers seeking tolerance for their errors always raise the specter and phantom of endless divisions over every possible difference. Brethren promoting a false unity-in doctrinal-diversity scare up the same ghost, offering their theories as the only alternative. Some brethren who know the truth on divorce and remarriage will not take an unmistakably clear stand for the truth and will not openly oppose and assail false doctrine. They are intimidated by the fear that to do so will result in division every time a difference of any kind occurs. This article will show that such fears are unfounded.

Are we doomed to divide over every difference of opinion, every conscientious difference, every difference of expression in teaching the truth, every difference in judgment as to the exact significance of a word or phrase in a passage, every difference in application of a common principle, every difference in unravelling a complicated case, every difference over whether or when to withdraw fellow-ship from certain parties, in short, over every difference of every nuance and of every magnitude? No, we are not so doomed! The answer is not that we must embrace and tolerate every possible difference in teaching and practice in order to escape the opposite extreme. Not only does sound, balanced Bible teaching avoid these opposite extremes, but also the general experience of brethren demonstrates the practical avoidance of both extremes.

Unity Mandated

The unity of God’s people is man-dated from heaven. Paul wrote by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, “I there-fore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:1-3).

This unity is not based on the arts of human diplomacy, crafty negotiation, and political compromise. Rather, it is a unity based upon a plat-form given by divine revelation: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father of all (vv. 4-6). This plat-form embodying the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ was revealed by and is perpetuated by New Testament apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (v. 11). The work of revealing truth was completed in the first century; the work of propagating and perpetuating that truth continues. God ordained this plan “for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ” (v. 12). As faithful men continue “speaking the truth in love,” they are able to maintain “the unity of the faith” along with the spiritual health and proper function of “the whole body” (vv. 13-16).

To save the lost and to strengthen the saved, gospel preachers are still proclaiming to all mankind the words of Jesus Christ on marriage, divorce, and remarriage:

But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery (Matt. 5:32).

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, comritteth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery (Matt. 19:9).

Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery (Mark 10:11-12).

Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery (Luke 16:18).

In short, Jesus gave one divine rule for all mankind. God’s law requires one man to be married to one woman for a lifetime. One and only one exception is given. When one mate commits an act of immorality, the innocent partner is permitted (though not required) to put away his or her mate, and to marry another.

No inspired apostle or prophet of the first century ever revealed anything which added to, subtracted from, or otherwise altered this law announced by the Lord of lords and King of kings during his earthly ministry. No New Testament evangelist ever preached any other doctrine. Our task today is to preserve, to preach, and to defend what Jesus and his apostles taught on this matter and on all other matters.

The Bible ground is the unity ground. During the 1800s in America, many people came out of sin, denominationalism, and error of various kinds with a determination to “speak as the oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). They were dedicated to a restoration of the ancient order of things by demanding positive divine authority for all that they preached and practiced. Speaking where the Bible speaks and being silent where the Bible is silent led them back to the Bible ground on marriage, divorce, and remarriage.

History records that these Christians generally believed that “no release” could be given to a mate “unless the other party has been guilty of fornication.” The claim of “desertion” as “a just cause for divorce and re-marriage” was rejected. Brethren were “cautious and circumspect in inspecting the marital status of their members and rigorously disciplined offenders. … In general, the churches were probably more diligent in enforcing their code of morality in this area than in any other” (David Edwin Harrell, Jr., Quest for a Christian America [Nashville, TN: Disciples of Christ Historical Society, 1966], pp. 196-97). What brethren did does not prove what we are to do, but it demonstrates that God’s plan for truth, purity, and unity will work if only we have the faith to work God’s plan.

Doubtless, further historical re-search will show that brethren patiently and vigorously discussed differences at times through the years. Perhaps some overreacted and others compromised with error. One thing is certain: Recent history shows the far-reaching implications and wide-ranging applications of error on the divorce issue. The issue has be-come more urgent because divorces and remarriages have become epidemic. History helps us to see the end results of certain courses of action, confirming the exhortations and warnings of Scripture, but our only authority in religion is the Bible and not the record of history (1 Cor. 4:6; 2 Thess. 2:15).

Inevitable, Unavoidable Division

While the system or scheme of redemption gives men time to learn and grow in the truth, the New Testament also warns against the danger of de-parting from the faith by teaching the doctrines and commandments of men (Heb. 5:12-14; 1 Tim. 1:3; 4:1; 2 John 9-11). When this begins to happen, brethren bear with one another as far as possible to permit time and opportunity for issues to be fully examined in the light of God’s word. When that process has been exhausted, brethren embracing error harden themselves in the error, and division becomes inevitable. “For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you” (1 Cor. 11:19).

How can we recognize an inevitable and unavoidable division coming? We live in a time when false theories on divorce and remarriage are being preached, pressed, and practiced. Four key earmarks of approaching, inevitable division can already be seen.

1. The theories being advocated and advanced directly contradict the fundamental rule, base lines, or perimeters given by Jesus (one man for one woman for life, the only exception being that a moral mate can put away a fornicator and marry another person). Some other rule is substituted for the one given by Jesus. It is not that brethren share the common playing field of truth given in such passages as Matthew 19:9 and differ only as to whether a given situation constitutes an infraction of the rules shared by all. No, the playing field itself is changed!

Totally new playing fields are created by these theories: The fornicator can marry a new mate; desertion in the absence of fornication permits subsequent marriages; alien sinners are not amenable to Christ’s law on marriage no matter what it means; baptism sanctifies adulterous marriages; and, adultery is non-sexual covenant breaking. All these theories openly advocate that people can stay in marriages contrary to the rule of one man for one woman for life, the only exception being that the innocent party can divorce the fornicator and marry another person. That is why division is inevitable.

2. Brethren defending these false theories almost invariably appeal to the premise that divine silence permits people to remain in marriages contrary to what Jesus stated. The absence of a specific prohibition is cited as authority, contrary to 1 Peter 4:11 (“If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God”). This reflects and reinforces a departure from the fundamental precepts of Bible authority. Rather than appealing to positive di-vine authority for their position, falseteachers make such arguments as, “Where does the Bible say certain people cannot remain in their marriages?” As we have learned from past apostasies, when one practice is justified by appealing to a perversion of divine silence, other practices are soon justified on the same basis. This makes division inevitable.

3. Because these theories involve an open departure from the rule of morality given by Jesus, and appeal to silence, they breed looseness on other moral issues as well. Error is a progressive and degenerative disease (2 Tim. 2:16; 3:13). As time goes on, more and more people under the influence of these theories participate in such worldly practices as immodest dress (in mixed swimming and daily dress too), gambling (lottery tickets and Las Vegas too), dancing, and drinking intoxicants (beer, wine, mixed drinks, etc.). This carnality will increase. Worldly-minded people and spiritually minded people inevitably separate themselves from each other (2 Cor. 6:17; Eph. 5:11).

4. Ninety percent of the fellowship question takes care of itself when the truth is consistently taught. False teachers will not tolerate the preaching of the truth, though they plead for toleration toward their teaching of error. This is generally true both of those who teach error on divorce and remarriage and those who claim the truth but want unity-in-doctrinal-diversity on the matter. People who cannot abide sound doctrine simply cannot abide the open examination of controversial issues and cannot stand the searchlight of truth (John 3:19-21; 2 Tim. 4:3-4). Such people eventually and inevitably go out from us (1 John 2:19).

(For further study on passages and principles directly setting forth fundamental truth on marriage, divorce, and remarriage, see my following articles: “Matthew 5:31-32 On Marriage and Divorce,” “Matthew 19:3-12 . . .,” “Luke 16:18…,” and “What Shall We Do With Christ’s Law on Marriage,” Guardian of Truth, 7 July, 18 Aug. 1983, pp. 397-99, 426-27, 431, 459, & 489-90 respectively; “David Lipscomb on Marriage and Divorce,” GOT, 1 Dec. 1983, pp. 707-709, 726-27; with Harry R. Osborne, Lee Stewart, and Tim P. Stevens, “Re-cent Studies With Homer Hailey on Divorce and Remarriage,” GOT, 17 Nov. 1988, pp. 689-91; “Matthew 19 and Deuteronomy 24: Moses and Christ,” GOT, 4 Jan. 1990, pp. 3-6; “Married for Life, With One Exception,” Searching the Scriptures, Sept. 1991, pp. 491-92; “Divorce and Re-marriage: No Waiting Game,” GOT, 18 Mar. 1993, pp. 168-69; Ward Hogland, “Comments on 1 Corinthians 7 by Ron Halbrook West Columbia, Texas” and my “Commendation of Gospel Truths’ Open Door Policy,” Gospel Truths, Aug. & Oct. 1993, pp. 175-77 & 223-24; “Temporal Consequences of Sin,” GOT, 16 Sept. 1993, pp. 558-59; “Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage: Study Material by J.W. McGarvey,” GOT, 2 Dec. 1993, pp. 716-19, 730; “`Marriage Is Honorable:’ A Study of Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage,” GOT, 20 June 1996, pp. 368-371. See also the Halbrook-Freeman Debate recently published by the G.O.T. Foundation.)

Guardian of Truth XL: No. 16, p. 16-18
August 15, 1996