Truth Magazine

By Andy Alexander

The Messiah who was to enter the world and bruise the head of Satan was to come through the seed of woman (Gen. 3:15). Genesis 12 teaches that this seed was to come from the family of a man by the name of Abram, whose name was later changed to Abraham (Gen. 12: I -3). But, of all the people on the face of the earth, why did God choose Abraham? God does not leave us to wonder about this question. He states concerning Abraham, “For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him” (Gen. 18:19).

Abraham was chosen by God because of his character. He was not chosen because he was sinless or would live a sinless life after being chosen, but because he was the type of individual who would want to please God and raise his family with that same desire. We want to look at this verse concerning Abraham’s character and notice some qualities that all fathers would do well to emulate in their life.

Abraham was an authoritative leader of his family. “He will command his children and his household after him” is a statement which illustrates this quality. Abraham was obviously not afraid of his children. Instead of letting his children and household dictate the rules, he commanded them! How different from the average household of today. Some fathers in today’s society seem to be intimidated by their sons and daughters. They are unsure of themselves and their authority; therefore, they make poor leaders and poor role models for their children.

Fathers, we are commanded by God to raise our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4). Our children are not to be left alone to raise themselves. They are not to be taught by the television set and disciplined by the school principal or local police. Their mother is not to be burdened with this job alone, but fathers are to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. An early start in life is one of the main keys to success in this job.

Secondly, Abraham was not a hypocrite. He commanded his family “after him.” In other words he set the proper example before them and then commanded them to follow. It is difficult, though not impossible, to follow orders from someone who will not live the life he teaches you to lead. One of the problems that our nation’s military is grappling with today is following a commander-in-chief who would not practice the things he may command others to do. The same is true in a household: children and wives have difficulty obeying fathers who will not practice the things they teach.

Fathers are not to provoke their children to anger and one of the surest ways of provoking them is to command them to refrain from some behavior that you are not refraining from yourself (Eph. 6:4). Teaching our children not to use tobacco while we continue to use it and make excuses for not quitting sends a contradictory message. Commanding them not to curse while continuing to curse and excusing ourselves because it is a habit that we just cannot seem to control is another mixed signal. Usually the child accepts the idea that it is really not that important and when the opportunity presents itself; the child experiments with various forms of vice. These are just a couple of examples. Many more could be added, but we can easily understand that children can see through our hypocritical commands.

A third characteristic of Abraham was that he commanded his children and his household to “keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment.” He commanded them in the right way, the only way. Some parents today seem to care little if their children depart from the faith. They bring them up in a haphazard manner allowing them to choose their own friends and when they reach dating age they allow them to date any and every-body that comes along. These parents give their children little or no guidance during their early years. Later, when these children fall away from the Lord, the parents lament the fact that they did not spend more time raising their children properly.

Abraham chose his son’s wife. Our customs differ somewhat from those of Abraham’s day, but parents today can have a much greater impact on their children’s future if they would just spend the time necessary to effectively do the job.

Fathers need to be more involved with their children and their children’s friends early in their life. There are times when a father needs to say to his child that he or she cannot date a certain person. This should be done very early in the relationship before a bond is formed between the two who are dating. Parents must also have earned their children’s trust through the years so that when decisions like this must be made, the child will trust their parent’s judgment even when they do not see the same danger their parents see.

Abraham was a man of good character and chosen by God as the man through whom the seed would come to bless all nations. He is an excellent role model for fathers today. He trusted God and led his family in his precepts. Families today need men like Abraham to lead them in “the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 23, p. 20
December 2, 1993

By By J.W. McGarvey  (Submitted by Ron Halbrook)

In answer to a query, I recently stated my opinion that the innocent party to a divorce is not prohibited by our Lord from marrying again. The following thoughtful article takes issue with me:

Marriage is a divine institution ordained of God; from the days of creation to the time of Moses there was one law, and this law made husband and wife one flesh until death severed the relation (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:3-8).

Moses permitted a man to put away his wife, and from Christ’s answer to the Pharisees it is evident that the divorce law in question never applied only to the one cause (Deut. 24:1; Matt. 19:3,8,9).

This divorce law did not belong to the patriarchal dispensation; it was a Mosaic law given because of the hard-heartedness of that people. Now, the question arises, Has it a place in Christianity? The very fact that Moses granted this law because the people were hard-hearted, should brand it with grave suspicion, for Christianity is longsuffering and forgiving.

Here I quote the Scripture to which our brother referred. “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 marrieth her that is divorced, committeth adultery” (Matt. 5:32). This Scripture certainly does not imply the conclusion drawn by our brother; quite the reverse. It plainly declares that the innocent wife and the one she marries become fornicators. Her former husband hath caused it, she being innocent when he put her away. This is as plain as any declaration on any subject can be.

When the Pharisees were through questioning Christ regarding the Mosaic divorce law, his disciples asked him of the same matter, and this was the impression they received; “If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to many” (Matt. 19:10; Mark 10:2-12).

Paul says, “And unto the married I command, yet not I but the Lord, let not the wife depart from her husband: but if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife” (I Cor. 7:10,11). Again Paul declares a woman to be bound by the law to her husband, and that she has liberty to many another only if her husband is dead (Rom. 7:1-3; 1 Cor. 7:39). “The law” referred to by Paul here is not the Mosaic law; it is that rule, ordained of God, which Christ declared existed from the beginning. If there is an exception to this rule or law, I have never found where Christ taught it to his disciples, or where the apostles taught it to the churches, but all to the contrary. “Scriptural grounds for divorce” ended with the beginning of Christianity. A man may leave his wife or the wife may depart from her husband, yet are they husband and wife, companions by covenant. Christ said God bath made them one. “What God hath joined together, let not man put as under.”

The church of God is polluted; the time has come that an Ezra appear and demand that they put away their strange wives or be separated from the congregation themselves. How would he be received?

Hialdsburg, Cal., C. E. Sandborn

Reply

When I said that the innocent party to a divorce is not prohibited by our Lord from marrying again, I meant the innocent party to a Scriptural divorce; that is, a divorce because of fornication. In his well-known words (Matt. 5:32) he condemns two things: (1) Putting away a wife saving for the cause of fornication, and (2) marrying a woman who is thus divorced. By the first it is necessarily implied that if the wife is put away for the cause of fornication, the husband is not censured, and the absence of any word to the contrary leaves him free to marry again. If Jesus had said, “Whosoever shall smite his neighbor, except in self-defense, is guilty of sin, “it would follow by necessary implication that a blow given in self-defense is not prohibited. So in all expressions of this kind.

In Matthew 19:9, the case stated is slightly different: “Whosoever putteth away his wife except for fornication and shall marry another, committeth adultery.” This is the case of a husband putting away his wife not for fornication. If he marries another, his is guilty; but, as in the other case, if he puts away his wife for the cause of fornication, it follows that he is not guilty in marrying another.

In I Corinthians 7:0, 11 and Romans 7:1-3, no fornication is supposed to have been committed. The womans duty is considered entirely apart from this, and Pauls teaching agrees perfectly with that of Jesus.

Brother Sandborns concluding statement, that “Scripture grounds of divorce ended with the beginning of Christianity,” should read, Divorce for any cause which satisfied the husband ended with the beginning of Christianity; for it is the latter which was temporarily permited by the law, and which Jesus no longer permits.

I fully agree with Brother Sandborn that the church of God is polluted by adulterous marriages of divorced persons, and that an Ezra is needed to purify it. We need an Ezra to weep over it, and a Nehemiah to pluck out the hair of the refractory; but the efforts at reform must always prove a failure if in condemning the guilty they also condemn the innocent. The General Council of the Episcopal Church broke down in its recent effort to suppress this sin in its own body, because so many of its members took the very position advocated by Brother Sandborn (Reprinted from Christian Standard, 6 Jan. 106, p.9)

Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 23, p. 15
December 2, 1993

By Dorris V. Rader

Trends and dangers among the people of God are frequently discussed by faithful watchmen in spiritual Israel. But people are generally slow to heed such warnings. This is not new. Paul and other faithful preachers warned in their day, of things that would happen after they were gone from the scene (Acts 20:28-31). While few would profit from such warnings, at least Paul would be free from their blood.

When our nation was suddenly plunged into the bloodiest and most costly war on December 7, 1941, it was not without warning. Some of our own wise statesmen had been saying that we had better get our house in order; that we would somehow be drawn into the world conflict. The exact mechanism of it, was not spelled out but the warnings were being sounded. But they fell on deaf ears until we found ourselves gravely crippled and only then were some willing to listen to danger signals. Somehow, brethren generally are like that. Only when the havoc of division and its heartaches are upon us, are we willing to get our heads out of the sand and see the trends and dangers that lurk in the way. Only then, will some be willing to study issues that already have brought havoc.

Recently, in a gospel meeting here at Westwood a lesson was presented by my son on some “trends” among us and the question posed was, “Where are we headed?” Reception of the lesson was apparently very favorable. Someone raised a very sobering question to me, “When do you reckon this church will depart? Not, “will it depart,” but “when”? He then made the observation that all the great churches we read about in the Scriptures did so, sooner or later.

Where is the Jerusalem church? That church had so much glorious history associated with it. It was there the church had its beginning (Acts 2:1-47). It was one of the largest churches ever, numerically strong. They were also of “one heart and one soul” (Acts 4:32). You know the great and wonderful things that happened among them. Yet, where is that church? How long did it remain true?

Where is the Antioch church that was such a radiating center for Christianity in those early days (Acts 13:1-14:28)? It was here that disciples were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). But where is Antioch now? How long did they hold out and remain a faithful congregation? The same observations can be made for Ephesus, Corinth, Philippi and others. Soon they were gone and no longer stood as a monument to the Lord’s cause. Such has happened to other great churches closer to us in time. Churches that once were radiating centers of the old Jerusalem Gospel have either died out or departed into digressive practices. That causes us to raise the sobering question, “When will it happen to this congregation?”

No claim is made to being a prophet or having any special insight into such matters, but I am going to tell you “when” such will happen to this church (the Westwood Church of Christ)

This church will depart when it says, “no” to God on any point of teaching or practice. You see, the church of the Lord is in the business of saying “yes” to God. Its role is to say “yes” to God in all things wherein God has spoken. The church belongs to God. He planned it (Eph. 3:10). Christ purchased it (Acts 20:28). Christ is head over all things to it (Eph. 1:22-23). Christ is king  he is the lawgiver (Jas. 4:12). The church is not a democracy but a supreme monarchy. Moses said in prophesying of Christ, “It shall come to pass that whosoever shall not hear that prophet shall be cut off from among the people” (Acts 3:22). Whatever we do, in word or in deed, we are to do it by his authority (Col. 3:17). It becomes treason to say “no” to the King.

The nation of Israel decided they would say “no” to God regarding the kind of government they would have. They said to Samuel, “Nay, but we will have a king …” This was not God’s will and he had stated his desire. But they said, “No” we will have a king. God said in effect, “You can say ‘no’ if you want to, but this is a bitter day for you.” He told them the manner of their king and what he would do. Still they said, “no” give us a king. God later declared that he gave them their king in his wrath and took him away in his anger (Hoz. 13:11). This was not the only time that nation said “no” to God. They adjusted themselves to the idea of telling God “no.” In Jeremiah’s day, when God pleaded with them through Jeremiah to walk in “the old paths,” they bluntly refused saying, “We will not walk therein” (Jer. 6:16). Their rebellion and arrogant spirit became more and more pronounced and set a pattern until it reached the ultimate in the rejection and brutal crucifixion of the spotless One himself. Finally, God’s longsuffering with them as a people came to an end with the crushing devastating destruction of Jerusalem the center of their national life. They brought upon themselves such tribulation as was not known prior to nor since. Their house was left desolate. But, bear in mind that they set for themselves a pattern of saying “no” to God.

When this church willingly says “no” to God on any point of doctrine, practice, precept or expression of his will, any biblical principle, that will be the beginning of the end for this church as his! Is it that serious? It was with Israel of old. Just one thing is important with God (read Jas. 2:10; Gal. 1:6-8; Mark 10:21). Can you name one thing in the will of God we can say “no” to God about with impunity?

Again, when this church decides to give more heed to human feelings than to God’s approval, it will be gone. There were those who would not confess Christ because they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:42). Surely we are to be conscious of human feelings and human association. But getting and maintaining human association on any basis other than what is God-pleasing is self destructive. Nobody was more sympathetic, and compassionate than Jesus, and yet there was never a human feeling or emotion that he was willing to allow to interfere with the Father’s will. In agony he prayed three times in the garden, “Not my will but thine be done.” Anytime this church becomes so concerned with getting people and keeping people at the expense of anything in the will of God, it will have gone! I have known of congregations, when disciplinary action was clearly a requirement of the Lord, to say, “we can’t afford to lose anybody.” Some have said, “I know the Bible says to do this, but he is too good of a giver and we can’t afford to lose his contribution.” Who can afford to lose the Lord’s approval? Who can afford to just let people go on their merry way to torment? In any matter if we become more concerned about human will than divine will, this church is no longer his.

Finally, if we allow just one untaught generation to grow up among us, the church will drift and be gone. This can happen either by neglecting to teach them fundamentals, or by their being taught falsely. In Judges 2:6-13 we read about a generation growing up and forsaking the God that their fathers served. They did evil and forgot God and were influenced by the doings of the people of the land in which they dwelt. The people served God all the days of Joshua and all the days of the elders that outlived him. They had seen the mighty works of God. But, a generation grew up untaught and unappreciative of God’s works.

Generally when a generation goes wrong, the preceding generation has to accept some of the blame for a lack of training, and preparation. This is not to say, that the generation that departs has no blame, for they do. Every person bears guilt for his own sins (Ezek. 18:20). Every one will give answer to God for his own deeds (2 Cor. 5:10). But, our children are our greatest heritage and each generation is responsible for teaching and training for the next. Someone asked, “When should one start training a child?” The reply given was, “Start with their grandparents before them.” There is much truth in that observation. Had the prior generation in Judges 2 followed instructions given in Deuteronomy 6:6, 4 it would have been a likely deterrent to their departure.

What safeguards are we setting that the next generation will be strong in the Lord, faithful to the book, true to God? Let me tell you if you are not doing what you can to teach your child true principles and set before that child a good example in Christianity, then you need not whine and wring your hands and say, “I don’t know what happened. I did the best I could.” Well, some have and despite their best efforts, the child as a free moral agent took a wrong course. Samuel was a good man, a man of God, but that was not an absolute guarantee against boys going wrong when they were on their own. But, I am talking about parents neglecting to teach, who will not put forth the effort to equip themselves to do the job, and maybe on top of all that become poor examples to their children in other matters of Bible principles.

That prior generation did not fight against the wickedness in the land as God directed (see Judg. 2:2-3). God scolded them for not obeying his voice in this. It was not enough to teach about the one God, they needed to aggressively oppose and fight the idols. They had not done so.

Brethren, neither we nor our children can hold idols in our hearts and serve God. Such idols become a snare to us and our children. An idol is anything we allow to come between us and loyalty to God. Idolatry is not dead. Money, prestige, affluency, popularity, pleasure, are a few that plague this generation.

It is a great tribute to Joshua’s influence that the people remained faithful all the days of Joshua. Joshua was a great and good influence on his time. Whatever others may do, remember that you are an individual and you will stand alone before God. Nobody will be able to answer for you. And even as you must one day stand alone in judgment, you should be willing, if need be, to stand alone to be faithful to him. You may think, “I am only one” or, “my voice is not being heard.” But, remember God hears, and God sees. And he it is that we are to serve.

Yes, somewhere in time, if it continues, this congregation will doubtless go the way of all others. It will eventually make its departure, like others. But, my resolve is that when it happens it will not be because of my influence and teaching, but rather in spite of it. Let each of us so resolve. And let us make our purpose and aim, “to serve the living God.”

Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 23, p. 22-23
December 2, 1993

By P.J. Casebolt

The danger of following human traditions is clearly and amply emphasized in the Bible (Matt. 15:3; Gal. 1:14). But Paul enjoined the Thessalonian brethren to “hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (2 Thess. 2:15).

At first, the gospel was preached by word of mouth (Mk. 16:20). Miraculous confirmation was needed in order to lend authenticity to the spoken word (Heb. 2:1-4). The apostle Peter saw the need for a permanent (written) revelation, and endeavored to provide that permanent record for use after his “decrease” (2 Pet. 1:15). The Holy Spirit was given to the apostles both for confirmation of the spoken word, and later for the written word (2 Tim. 3:16,17).

The proponents of false doctrine have long recognized the effectiveness of the written word, and have used that medium to disseminate their false teaching. We need to place as much emphasis on our efforts and opportunities to use the printed pageas a means of teaching the truth and counteracting false doctrine.

It is said of Abel’s faith and offering, “… and by it he being dead yet speaketh” (Heb. 11:4). Not only does our example speak long after we are gone from this earth, but what we write can also continue to speak on our behalf, and to the salvation of other souls. This fact was impressed upon me during my recent trip to preach the gospel in the Philippines (February/March 1993).

In recent years, several able and influential Filipino preachers have departed this life. Some have died of natural causes, and at least one was murdered. Among the most recent of these voices stilled by death was that of Vic Tibayan. There was an emptiness felt not only in the Manila area, but also throughout the islands, because of the stilled voice of this able proclaimer and defender of the truth.

Because of Vic’s death, and because my visits to the islands are infrequent, I decided to let one remaining influence for good know that I and others appreciate his efforts. In Pagadian, I laid my hand on the shoulder of brother Ramon Carino, Sr., and told him that his work and labors were appreciated by me and by many, and that we wished for him many more years of faithful service in the Lord’s cause. Without hesitation, Remon replied, “To God be the glory.” But then I prevailed upon Ramon to tell me how he was converted from error to the truth.

At the time of his conversion, brother Carino was effective, and like Saul of Tarsus, “profiting” in his denominational religion. Ramon was also a Japanese prisoner of war for several months, and the story of his life would make good reading. More than one factor contributed to his conversion, but the main thing which caused Ramon to wrestle with his religious convictions was a tract handed to him by a Filipino brother. The tract was written by brother Luther Blackmon, who has been dead for several years. Luther Blackmon was probably still living when R.G. Carino read his tract, but I do not think that the two ever met. I do not know if Luther ever knew about the influence his tract had on brother Carino or not. But brother Carino knows, and now I know. And so does the Lord.

For good or for bad, what we do, what we say, and yes, what we write, speaks long after we are gone. So think, speak, act, and write as those who are conscious of this fact.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII, No. 23, p. 7
December 2, 1993