Truth Magazine

By Robert Wayne La Caste

When most people think of the Northwest they think of beautiful mountains, rushing whitewater rivers and enormous wildlife. Surely it is all of this and more. Of all the places in the world, surely this one more than most “declares the glory of God and sheweth his handiwork” (Psa. 19:1). It is also the home of many brethren of like precious faith.

The Lord has blessed me with the privilege of holding gospel meetings there since 1976. Just about every time I do, I am destined to be asked about the condition of the church there. Often questions are asked about the congregations and their stand on the matter of marriage and divorce. In just about every meeting I have held in this state, I have preached on this subject, usually at their request. Regrettably, I have learned some have not asked me to hold a meeting for them because they don’t like what I teach about it. While it is true many of the churches have brethren believing error on this subject, it is equally true that there are brethren standing for the truth of all the gospel.

In the state of Washington, I have preached meetings at Walla Walla, Richland, Prosser, Sunnyside, Yakima, and Enumclaw. In fact I just finished two fine meetings this last October with the saints in Yakima and Sunnyside. There are several others standing for truth besides these and though the Richland church had to disband, all the others are seeing that all the truth of the gospel is preached. In just about every church there are some very sincere brethren believing error on the subject, but most I have met want to believe and do what the Lord wants.

What is most regrettable is that in more than a dozen meetings, a Pentecostal debate, and a lectureship on the errors of Realized Eschatology in the state of Washington, never has any of the preachers who differ with me on marriage, divorce and remarriage approached me and said, “Brother La Coste, you teach error on it and we need to talk to you. ” Three of these meetings, along with a lectureship I was a part of, were held with the saints at Enumclaw, Washington. These brethren are very near and dear to my heart as are all the saints in that part of the country. While some of the brethren from different churches came and we studied together on marriage, divorce and remarriage, none of the preachers from the Seattle area or any other part of the state ever approached me in any way, shape or form. Does this not seem strange to you? For years it seemed strange to me, but lo and behold, now I understand why these preachers, not only in Washington but in most other places avoid not only those who preach on it, but avoid the subject pretty much altogether!

It’s Too Controversial

Marriage, divorce and remarriage are not the only subjects many preachers are avoiding. This one must be placed at the top of the list. The mentality exists that “this is too controversial and will cause trouble if preached.” Following this earthly wisdom, it’s a wonder any of these preach anything! Most every subject in the Scriptures is controversial. Anything really controversial is pretty much off limits to the PMA (positive mental attitude) crowd. After all, how can you help people to “feel good about themselves” if you even remotely hint that they may be in an unscriptural marriage? Have those with this attitude forgotten the Lord’s statements concerning why he came the first time? His coming was not to “bring peace, but a sword” (Matt. 10:34). The Lord knew that truth would “set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law” (Matt. 10:35). Truth will always be controversial, for truth demands right and opposes wrong, condemns evil but condones good, uplifts but also, “casts down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5).

There can not be peace at any price brethren. Peace with God (Phil. 4:7) comes by way of fellowship with God (1 In. 1:7), but where men refuse to walk in his ways, there is neither. When men refuse to preach the Lord’s will on such matters as marriage, divorce and remarriage, and even refuse to openly and honestly discuss such, you might have peace and fellowship with members of the church, and you may have people “feeling good” about themselves, but how does God feel about them? That’s the fellowship that really counts. When men do not stand for the purity and yes the simplicity of Jesus Christ on marriage, divorce and remarriage, churches are destined to have fellowship with people in adulterous marriages. Many already are! How I would hate to stand before the Judge of all the earth one day and have to give answer for adulterous marriages being in my spiritual family, when I took no measures to oppose and avoid such.

A gospel preacher is a man who “declares the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). When he speaks, he speaks, “as the oracles of God” (I Pet. 4:11). His message seeks to “reprove, rebuke, and exhort” and is delivered “in season and out of season” (2 Tim. 4:2). He preaches to “please God and not man” (Gal. 1:10). This is not a popularity contest and the gospel preacher is not asking for votes to hold a political office. He therefore doesn’t want pats on the back while he scratches the patters itching ears. He is one who is “always set for the defense of the gospel” (Phil. 1:17). He “con-tends earnestly for the faith, once and for all delivered” (Jude 3).

However, this “we don’t discuss it because it will cause trouble” ideology has caused more than a few to the church? When James Bales and others wrote and preached their institutional “gospel” these Northwest preachers stood and countered such with a “thus saith the Lord.” Yet, when the same James Bales, and many others preached his heresy on “Not Under Bondage” these preachers acted like a whipped dog who runs away with his tail between his legs looking for a place to hide. Is either of these subjects less controversial than the other? No, but the fact of the matter is, that the reason they cowered is because some didn’t know how to answer, while others agreed in whole, if not in part with the error.

And what of the fence sitters? Some of our older preachers believe the truth on these matters, but they won’t come out of the closet and be heard. Little, if any of their writings, have spoken out against error on this. These are the guys who have blasted away at our younger preachers for doing what they should have done themselves early on! Brethren, the “middle of the road” was meant for yellow lines and dead animals. It is surely no place for those who love the law of the Lord Jesus. We need to stand, stand immediately and stand firm on the teaching of Jesus Christ.

Quality or Quantity?

One brother expressed to us while we were in open their eyes! Several brethren in Enumclaw, who have been there many years, tell me the story of how these long time Northwest preachers stood their ground on such matters as the work of the church, church sup-port of orphanages and the sponsoring church arrangement. Many debates were held and these Northwest preachers stood publicly and “shucked down the corn” when it came to these matters. They stood boldly and fearlessly against those who sought to teach error on the church in these respects. Without hesitation they challenged for debates and when they got them they defended the Lord’s truth admirably. Now, lo and behold . . . these same preachers have ducked their heads between their legs and are found to be playing “hide and seek” when it comes to the truth on marriage, divorce and remarriage. Some of the brethren located there couldn’t believe it! These same preachers were asked directly how they could cower on the subject of marriage, divorce and remarriage, wave the white flag of surrender, and fade away as though it were not even in the word of God? Where now was that same boldness, tenacity and zeal that had condemned the false teaching and evil practices of brethren on the work of

Washington this concern: “If we limit our fellowship just to those people who divorced for fornication and remarried on that basis, this would cause the church to be even that much smaller, and the Lord knows it is small enough now.” Can you believe this? Can you believe any Christian would be this ignorant of the Lord’s will? I’ve heard Elmer Moore say that “some Christians don’t know if the Lord died on Calvary or was shot at Bunker Hill.” I think this brother may be in that category. I tell you something else the Lord knows brethren. The Lord “knoweth those who are his.” But Paul doesn’t stop there. He hastens to tell Timothy, “Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2 Tim. 2:19). Adulterous marriages are iniquity. They are “lawlessness.” Our choice is clear. We must have “no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11).

Since when is God interested in numbers? Is the Lord more concerned about the size of the church or the purity and holiness of the church? The prophet Gideon learned that God is more interested in quality over quantity. Gideon’s soldiers at the first were too many, yet even then they were not numbered. God wanted a selected and we might say “hand picked” force to do his bidding. With a smaller force, Gideon led God’s army against their enemies and was victorious (Judg. 7). It’s as though preachers are afraid they won’t be supported, or the church will just fold up if they preach and insist on what God’s word teaches. Has it dawned on these of “little faith” that God will always richly bless his people, both individually and collectively when they seek to teach and do his will? Or, is it possible some of these preachers are in unscriptural marriages and in an effort to justify themselves they have therefore embraced Bale’s or Hailey’s or someone else’s position? Is it possible they don’t want to discuss these matters, for if they do, the skeleton in some of their closets, known as a previous wife, will come creaking out? Of course, by the time you get through listening to most of the views of these and other men on marriage, there isn’t any such thing as an adulterous marriage. They redefine adultery, they twist a Scripture one way and other Scripture another way, they say that the alien sinner isn’t under God’s marriage law in the first place, and if none of that works, they try washing away unscriptural marriages down the baptismal drain! (Repentance, what is that?) So by the time they use plan A, B, or C of their human wisdom, which ever one will fit most conveniently, then an adulterous marriage doesn’t even exist, so why worry about whether you are having fellowship with it or not? God help us!

Sadness Yet Rejoicing

This trip last year to Washington state was a moving experience in more ways than one. A precious beloved sister, Lindy Henry had just died before my coming, with cancer.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 11, p. 16-18
June 3, 1993

By Marvin Cossey

A familiar verse in the New Testament and one that is often quoted is Matthew 7:1 where Jesus says, “Judge not, that ye be not judged.” Unfortunately, many people quote this verse for the purpose of justifying sin.

When one rebukes or criticizes a sinful practice he is often met with the reply “judge not.” Liberal columnists implore their readers not to be judgmental. There is the familiar T.V. line, “How dare you judge me!” recited when wrongdoing is challenged.

The homosexual defends his perverted lifestyle and quotes Matthew 7:1 to discourage criticism. The abortion advocate cries “judge not” to defend the sin of abortion. Still others consider any criticism of sin to be “judging.”

Did Jesus forbid the rebuking of sin when he said, `.`Judge not, that ye be not judged”? Does Matthew 7:1 prohibit all criticism of sin and immorality?

An honest study of the Scriptures will show that the answer to both questions is a resounding no!

If Matthew 7:1 does not forbid the condemnation of sin, what does it forbid? Let’s read further in the same chapter. In verses 3 and 4, Jesus discusses the person who is concerned about the mote in his brother’s eye and does not consider the beam in his own eye. Verse 5 reads: “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.”

Paul says in Romans 2:1, “Therefore thou are inexcusable, 0 man, whosoever thou art that judgest; for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.”

Jesus, in Matthew 7:1, and Paul, in Romans 2:1, were speaking of those who would judge others while doing the same things! The action forbidden by these passages is hypocritical judgment.

We must not be guilty of hypocritical or unrighteous judgment. This is made clear by the Scriptures. This fact, however, in no way nullifies the Christian’s obligation to condemn sin. To put it simply, we must judge only “righteous judgment” (Jn. 7:24).

Those who quote the Bible to justify sin can find no comfort in the words of Jesus. Let us understand that the Bible justifies no sin, but rather condemns all sin!

The Christian must ever be ready to speak out against unrighteousness. We must not be deterred by those who would falsely accuse us. “Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear” (1 Tim. 5:20).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 11, p. 13
June 3, 1993

By Murray C. Wade

In recent times, efforts to spread the gospel have been focused primarily on sending preachers out to areas lacking congregations of the Lord and on providing congregations with “full-time” evangelists. The idea is also prevalent that without “fully-salaried” preachers the Lord’s work will not be accomplished and a congregation is not doing its job. The point of this article is not to de-emphasize the importance of “fully-supported” evangelists in the Kingdom of the Lord. They are and will continue to be an important part of the Lord’s work. However, while focusing so much of our time and effort on the full-time evangelist, we may neglect and overlook the importance of the other evangelists.

I have known many preachers and teachers of the gospel who have chosen to provide for their families by working an occupation in the world. For myself, there came a point in my maturing as a Christian when I had to think long and hard, spending time in prayer and Bible study, to decide whether I should pursue the occupation of an evangelist. My decision was to support my family with a secular job (as a biologist) while working as hard as I could as a preacher and teacher for the Lord. I do not think this decision was inconsistent with the apostle Paul’s decision to provide for himself at certain times in his life as a Christian while still preaching and teaching at every opportunity (Acts 18:1-3; 20:34-35; 1 Cor. 4:12; 1 Thess. 2:9; 2 Thess. 3:7-9).

My situation is by no means unique. I dare say that there are thousands of Christian men who have made a similar choice. But from time to time I have heard brothers and sisters in the Lord belittle the importance of this type of life when compared with the life of a “fully-supported” evangelist. The idea is that if a church does not have a “full-time” preacher they are either unfortunate or failing. Acts 8:4 describes early growth in the church as not necessarily the result of supported evangelists. Yet there remain those who may not appreciate the efforts of the other evangelists of the Lord.

Another group of Christians we sometimes overlook in the work of evangelism are the elders, men who have proven themselves as strong Christians, who preach and teach God’s word, and who stand up for truth (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Tit. 1:5-9). Those who rule well are worthy of payment for their efforts (1 Tim. 5:17-18). With the office of elder comes the awesome task of leading, defending, and caring for the flock of God. These responsibilities demand much time, love, and patience. Surely if we can support evangelists for their dedication to preaching and teaching we can support elders for the tremendous work that they do (1 Tim. 5).

Many times we will send young preachers to difficult areas, such as the northeast. I saw in my years in New York that many of those would get discouraged, abandon the work very quickly and relocate, or leave the faith completely. Others would preach conditionally upon obtaining full sup-port. Maybe in such cases where strong mature Christians are needed to spread the gospel we should consider sending those who have met the qualifications of elders. Those who will remain firm in the truth no matter what, who will in-still the wisdom of their years to young converts, who will make sure the gospel is preached, and who have the experience to deal with trying areas (2 Tim. 2:2).

The Bible gives a picture of strong churches with elders sending out preachers (Acts 11:19-26; 15:22; 1 Pet. 5:1). Would a church be a failure if the duties of preaching and teaching were carried out by non-supported elders and the other Christian men of the congregation, while the congregation provided for sending out evangelists? Certainly not, and as a matter of fact there are congregations of the Lord that have decided to do this. To me this describes a mature church. But many today might say, we need a “fully-supported evangelist.”

Constantly we stress the importance of the “full-time” evangelist. Yet a Christian is to be full-time in his work to the Lord no matter what his occupation (Lk. 9:23). We are to be subjects of our King whether at work, in our neighborhood, in our homes, or in the assembly. Our lives need to be the Lord’s (Gal. 2:20) and our work is to stand for truth as being good examples (Col. 4:5-6; 1 Pet. 3:13-17) that others may be influenced to turn to God (Jas. 5:10-20). Each one of us comes in contact with people every day whose only chance to learn of God may be through our efforts (2 Cor. 3:2-3).

Whether we are working as Christians, elders, evangelists (supported or not), or teachers, we are all necessary to accomplish the Lord’s will in spreading his word (Gal. 4:7-16). The “big I’s and little you’s” that a brother once expressed to me does not apply in the Lord’s Kingdom. We all have gifts and should appreciate them, not over or under emphasizing a particular group (1 Pet. 4:7-11). We should all encourage one another in the talents we have (Matt. 25:14-30; Rom. 12:6-8).

There are many Christians working hard in the Lord’s Kingdom who are teaching, preaching, and spreading the gospel who would not be defined as “a fully supported evangelist.” The Lord needs all of us to accomplish his will (Eph. 4:16). I pray he will continue to provide us with the strength to carry on, for the rest we all long for is not in this world. Our rest remains in heaven where we can all be together someday (Heb. 4:8-10).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 11, p. 8-9
June 3, 1993

By J. Wiley Adams

Recently a friend of mine, who is a car salesman and who is a member of a popular denomination, was discussing some religious-minded friends of his with me. He seemed greatly impressed with their apparent piety and devoutness, thinking perhaps that I also would be impressed if he told me about them. In fact, he said he had known them to drive as much as fifty miles to attend a revival. “Yessiree, Mr. Adams, I tell you they are real, full-blooded Christians!”

I thought about that all the way home. Then it seemed to me there had to be a lesson in there somewhere. What is a full-blooded Christian? We hear of full-blooded dogs, cats, horses, and take great pride in their pedigrees. We sometimes say they are “registered.” Well, I have a beige-colored poodle who has “papers.” But something is wrong somewhere. The “papers” declare positively that he is a “toy poodle” but he is much closer to the next class which is a “miniature.” Now the papers from the kennel club certify him to be full-blooded in his class. But I know better than that. All you have to do is look at him. Now I like him and all that but he surely has some “off-blood” from somewhere in the past.

I read in the New Testament about how to become a Christian. We are to be born of the water and the spirit. (In. 3:3-5). We must learn from the Scriptures to establish faith (Rom. 10:17) because without it we cannot please God (Heb. 11:6). When we believe we must confess it (Rom. 10:10). To those on Pentecost who had reached that point, the command was given to “repent and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). Those who did this were added to the church by the Lord (Acts 2:47). These believers were disciples of Christ and thus Christians (Acts 11:26). These Christians, set apart for the Lord’s service having been redeemed from sin by the blood of Christ were to conduct themselves in such a way that others could just look at them and see the difference between them and the world. Jesus said to them, “Ye are the light of the world” in Matthew 5:14. He then added, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.”

But, I tell you brethren, the way some of the so-called saints act, you would never be able to look at them and come to the conclusion that they are “full-blooded” Christians. The mark of the world is on them. There is as much darkness as there is light in their lives. John wrote to the church at Smyrna in Revelation 2:10b and commanded them to be faithful to death. The apostle Paul told the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 15:58 to “always abound” in the work of the Lord. The same writer also commended young Timothy for his sincerity and unfeigned faith (2 Tim. 1:5).

Let us strive, brethren, to be genuine and true and always abound. Let us strive for purity and holiness in all we do. Let us be what we purpose to be. Let’s be “full-blooded” Christians.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 11, p. 9
June 3, 1993