Truth Magazine

By Lewis Willis

Alright, I admit it: I listen to country music. A few weeks ago I wrote an article about a line in a country song which said, “Some of God’s greatest gifts are unanswered prayers.” Well, by now you have guessed it, I heard another line in another song and I think it deserves our consideration in this article.

A performer has a song out with this line: “You’ve got to stand for something, or you’ll fall for anything. ” That is certainly a truism! However, it is true, not because a country song says so, but because the Bible says so.

There are many passages which teach us the importance of “taking a stand” for God, and against the Devil and error. Let me cite some of these. Paul told the Ephesians to, “Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. . . Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. . . Stand therefore” (Eph. 6:11-14). He also reminded the Corinthians of the meaning of being a Christian. He said, “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand” (1 Cor. 15:1). As he was closing his first epistle to Corinth, Paul admonished, “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong” (1 Cor 16:13). Paul said to the Philippians that he wanted to hear “that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel” (Phil. 1:27). He also told these brethren to “stand fast in the Lord” (Phil. 4:1). Several other New Testament passages require that Christians take a stand for Truth, against error (Rom.5:2; Col. 4:12; 1 Thess. 3:8; 2 Thess. 2:15; 1 Pet. 5:12). The responsibility is clearly and emphatically appointed to us – Take a stand with and for God, for truth, and against sin.

One would suppose that a faithful Christian would look at this evidence and take a stand. Many do! But, many others don’t! When Paul wrote to Timothy, he said, “At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me” (2 Tim. 4:16). Most of us would like to think we would have stood firmly with him for the truth. But just “thinking” it is not “doing” it. Thus, he warned, “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). There is an ever present danger that we will not carry through with our convictions and stand for right, against evil. The road of time is littered with the remains of those who knew that they should have stood for Christ and the gospel, but failed to do so. “The cause of truth has suffered immeasurably because God’s people did not find the courage at the hour of trial to stand for that cause.” Too many fell for error!

The Apostle Paul addressed the question of “falling for anything” when he talked about the edification of God’s people. He wrote, “That we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (Eph. 4:14). When Jesus warned of the danger which false teachers present, he said, “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:14). Note Peter’s warning: “Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness” (2 Pet. 3:17).

It is evident that a failure to stand for Truth, subjects us to the possibility that we will fall for error. God’s people have not been diligent in guarding against this danger. Practically every generation has had “issues” of right and wrong with which to grapple, and each time these questions arise, scores “fall for” error. There is no way to measure what the strength of the church today would be if we had not lost these people through apostasy. Had they stood for the truth of God’s word, they would not have fallen for such errors as instrumental music, missionary societies, benevolent societies, church supported colleges and fellowship halls.

I trust that by now you are aware that a major problem is developing in the church regarding the truth about marriage, divorce and remarriage. I thought we knew the basic truth about this subject, but evidently we don’t. Those who are teaching error regarding the matter are men who should know better. History and the Scriptures say that they will teach their error and many will fall for it (Acts 20:29-30). It is not yet possible to determine what the effect of their heresy will be. It is rather obvious that it will not be good for the cause of our Lord. So, the warning that “you’ve got to stand for something, or you’ll fall for anything, ” is an appropriate warning again. We had better make up our minds to stand for the Truth about God’s teaching on marriage or we will fall for anything that false teachers might say on the subject, depending upon the confidence we happen to have in the false teacher. Does history always have to repeat itself, or will God’s people finally learn to stand for truth?

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, p. 458
August 6, 1992

By Joe R. Price

Scientists believe they have discovered relics of the “Big Bang” which they say created the universe 15 billion years ago. These celestial fossils are “massive wisps of gas more than 500 million light years long” and are the “oldest structures ever observed” according to astrophysicist George Smoot (Salt Lake Tribune, Al, 4/24/92). The discovery of these gaseous masses is now being described as “one of the major discoveries of science.” It seems incredible that upon discovering these “structures,” many continue to be believe that they were “built,” not by an intelligent builder, but by such lifeless, thoughtless things as “gravitational forces,” “space” and “time.”

If you are unfamiliar with the “Big Bang” theory, here is a brief summary of it:

The Big Bang is perhaps one of the most difficult physics concepts for laymen to accept. Its chief assumption is that 15 billion years ago all matter in the universe was compressed into an unimaginably dense sphere smaller than the period at the end of this sentence.

The ball exploded at a temperation of trillions of degrees, launching all the matter on the expansionary course it continues to follow today. Within the first millionth of a second after the explosion, quarks and other exotic particles combined to form protons and neutrons, most of which were just as rapidly annihilated by collisions with antiprotons and anti-neutrons, releasing their energy in the form of light waves (Salt Lake Tribune, Al, 4/24/92).

What an amazing theory! But before you believe it, we offer a few questions with which to test it. First, where did “all matter” which was in the form of an “unimaginably defense sphere” come from (matter is not eternal)? And, what tremendous power compressed all that matter into such an amazingly small size (“Honey, I shrunk the universe! “). Also, what generated a temperature of “trillions of degrees”? Truly, the “Big Bang” theory of the origin of the universe is an “assumption”!

The presence of gaseous structures of such massive size (500 million light years) provides greater evidence that some power, which is infinitely superior to man, constructed them. It remains true that design demands a designer. This Master Builder would have the ability to create matter and put it under the control of such forces as gravity, space and time. This Master Designer is God, who has revealed his power and divinity through his creation (Rom. 1:20), and his mind through the inspired Scriptures (1 Cor. 2:10-13,16; 2 Tim. 3:16-17).

When will man learn to look at the incredible evidence in the universe for the creative power and presence of God (Psa. 19:16)? Like the ancient skeptics, the so-called wise men of today are “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2 Tim. 3:7). The evidence in the universe explodes the “Big Bang” theory!

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, p. 459
August 6, 1992

By Jerry Crolius

The National Center for Health Statistics says there were nearly 2.4 million weddings in 1988. Some 10.7 percent of these marriages were divorced men marrying never-married women, and 10.9 percent were marriages of divorced women to never-married men. (There were no figures reported in the article about how many marriages united a divorced man with a divorced woman, but it is safe to say that in at least 30 percent of today’s new marriages, one or both spouses have been previously married and divorced.) “Everything is changing,” says Beverly Sitnick, bridal manager at the Claire Dratch women’s specialty store in Bethesda, MD. “I’m noticing so many combinations of divorced and single people. “

Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist at John Hopkins University who studies divorce and remarriage in the USA, made these comments when the statistics were released: “If this says anything, it says divorce is becoming more acceptable and less of a barrier to getting remarried. There isn’t much difference between being divorced and single when you’re marrying a spouse.

From our society’s viewpoint, then, divorce and remarriage is acceptable. This phenomenon is greatly affecting the Lord’s church, and it is likely we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. Brethren, we had better accept the Lord’s teaching about divorce and remarriage and contend for it earnestly if we are to remain faithful Christians and faithful churches in the future.

Jesus made his teaching on the sanctity of marriage very clear. All the fuss in the Lord’s church over divorce and remarriage is rooted in our unwillingness to submit to the Lord’s plain teaching. Jesus said in Matthew 19:9, “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for fornication (sexual unfaithfulness, JC, and marries another woman commits adultery.” In Matthew 5:32, Jesus said, “But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the cause of fornication, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” Jesus added that the woman “who divorces her husband and marries another is committing adultery” (Mk. 10:12). Is this so difficult to understand?

The Lord does not condone divorce, he does not allow divorce, and he does not allow divorced people the right to remarry. The only exception to this law is when one spouse divorces the other for sexual unfaithfulness, in which case only the “innocent” spouse may remarry without committing adultery. Jesus spoke this doctrine plainly and to the point.

What is the problem, then, in the Lord’s church? Many in the church do not want to accept Jesus’ plain teaching. Jesus spoke to the point of issue at hand. He stated his law simply and clearly. But many have made Jesus’ plain statement into one full of confusion and doubt, creating “loopholes” (under the banner of compassion) for divorced persons to drive sin through.

A strict doctrine will cost too much, people say. Too many people who divorced at a young age will have too high a price to pay, they say. Too many people who have been wrongly divorced by their spouses will suffer for a lifetime, they say. Too many divorced people will never become Christians because of this law, they say. Too many Christians with children and happy homes will discover that they are living in adultery and will have to change their relationship; or they will find a different church that allows them to continue in adultery; or they will stop attending anywhere, they say. It will tear up the church, they say. It will tear up families, they say. It will tear up children, they say. Sadly, many of these statements are true. But I suppose the disciples had similar things in mind when, in obvious discouragement, they answer the Lord, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry” (Matt. 19:10). Things haven’t changed that much after all, have they?

What would the Lord say in response to us in his church today? Probably the same thing he said in response to the disciples, “Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given” (Matt. 19:11). Essentially, Jesus said, “My statement (law) is plain. There are those who will accept it and there are those who will reject it.” Those to whom it has not “been given” are not able to accept it. Only the ones to whom it has “been given” are able to “accept it.” Jesus said there are haves and have nots. The haves will understand, receive and submit to his teachings on marriage. The have nots will not understand, receive or submit to his teachings.

But who are the haves and who are the have nots? Let Paul answer in 1 Corinthians 2:14, “But an unspiritual man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually examined.” Those to whom it has “been given” are spiritually-minded people, i.e., they base their judgments on God’s revealed will through the Spirit, and are therefore able to understand and willing to accept God’s teachings. Unspiritually-minded people base their judgments on their own observations, desires, and opinions, and are therefore unable to understand and unwilling to accept the teachings of God as revealed by the Spirit. This is just what is happening in the Lord’s church on the issue of divorce and remarriage.

Those who advocate loose doctrines on divorce and remarriage are not able to understand Jesus’ clear teaching because they are unwilling to accept it. They base their understanding first on human thinking and desires rather than the revealed things of God’s Spirit (i.e., they are unspiritual on this subject).

Where in all these doctrines are the plain statements of Jesus? They are buried under the rationalizations and emotions of minds who do not want to accept the serious consequences of Christ’s law on divorce and remarriage. Man is going to find a way out of the difficult consequences of sin, whether or not God has granted him one. Man has been doing so since the Garden of Eden. (I remember a debate on baptism where the gospel preacher in his final statement quoted over and over Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Galatians 3:27 until he finally said, “I don’t know what else to do. It’s so plain. Why add to or take anything away from it? ” Yet the Baptist preacher was unable to understand it. See the point?)

Notice that contained within all the intricate doctrines of men on divorce and remarriage are complex human reasonings, improperly re-defined words, out-of-context forced interpretations, and strong appeals to emotion, all of which combine into “rational” escapes from what Jesus plainly spoke. “He didn’t mean what he said,” is the core of these doctrines. “He was only talking to the Jews, not to us,” some rationalize. “He was only making a law for those who would already be Christians, not for people outside of his kingdom,” others reckon in sincere hope for the many. “In 1 Corinthians 7:15 Paul adds another exception for remarriage to Jesus’ teaching,” others say with sympathy for those divorced by unbelieving spouses. “Already divorced people can ‘mentally divorce’ and remarry if their ex-spouse commits fornication at some time in the future,” many scribes tell us. “If people get baptized they can stay in their adulterous marriages because God has forgiven them.” And on and on. Loophole after loophole. We are guilty of the very sins Jesus condemned the Pharisees for in their doctrines on divorce.

Jesus had another thing to say in response to the disciples’ difficulty with his plain teaching. He said, “For there are eunuchs (those who remain celibate) who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it” (Matt. 19:12). Jesus said there are some people who will stay celibate for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.

Singles may choose never to marry, perhaps even for reasons Paul states in 1 Corinthians 7:32-35. Or unscripturally divorced people may submit to Christ’s law on remarriage and stay celibate because they are under Christ’s rule and want to please him above all things. They will control their sexual desires for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. They will accept the consequences of their (or their ex-spouse’s) sin of unlawful divorce, and not try to find a way out of Christ’s plainly taught law. Will spiritually-minded brethren sympathize with them? Certainly. Will they help them? Definitely. Will they compromise Christ’s law for them? Absolutely not.

Jesus’ teaching on divorce and remarriage is clear. He intended it to be so. The disciples understood the consequences of it. They knew it was a strict law. The ones who are able to accept it, let them accept it. And if we want ourselves and our children to go to heaven, let us contend earnestly for it. The Lord’s church faces threatening times.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, pp. 462-463
August 6, 1992

By Robert F. Turner

A genuine “local church” has its beginning in the determination of individuals to put Christ absolutely first in their lives. Each one must make this decision, without regard to what anyone else may do. Service to the Lord according to one’s knowledge of the truth, must have precedence to all else. One may have just learned of Christ, and submitted to him in baptism. Another, having learned the truth more perfectly, may have left a denomination or maybe a “church” that is unfaithful in doctrine and practice. But in each case the individual must have acted in keeping with conscience toward God, not for social or business purposes, or peer pressure.

Now, these individuals are brought together by their common faith, and determination to serve God as a “team.” Instructions and examples in the New Testament lead them to this decision (Heb. 10:25; 1 Cor. 1:2). The local church is a distinct entity: not a saint (1 Tim. 5:16), and not simply a plurality of saints (Matt. 18:17). It is a company (Acts 15:22), formed by mutual agreement of its members (9:26-28), who function as one in specific activities (1 Cor. 5:4; 16:3; Phil. 4:15). From these and many like Scriptures we conclude that members of a local church enter into covenant relationship with one another.

Many brethren of our day may not think of local membership in this way; and that failure may account for “congregation hopping” over trivial likes and dislikes – refusing to recognize our responsibility to the Lord and to fellow saints in the local church. Unless one has had an active part in planning and forming a new local church, the whole idea of “covenant relationship” may seem strange – and few indeed may think of putting this “covenant” into written form. But it has been done, both by our earlier brethren and by others who claim to practice congregational independence.

Recently an elderly member of the Oaks-West church asked me to see that a church “Record Book” passed to her father be repaired and made available to the community it touched. The tattered and time stained leaves of the book revealed the beginning of a Missionary Baptist Church, in Burnet County, Texas, “May the 29th, A.D. 1869.” I am not saying such written “covenants” are necessary, nor am I offering this as an example for present use. For one thing, they begin by “adopting the Articles of Faith as held by the Austin Baptist Association.” I could not endorse that even if it read, “as held by a majority of the Churches of Christ in Texas.” But I believe all of us can profit by considering the spirit of the “covenant relationship” so apparent in what follows.

So we do now solemnly covenant with each other (as God shall enable us) to walk together in brotherly love –

That we will exercise a Christian care and watchfulness over each other, and faithfully warn, rebuke and admonish our brethren as the case may require –

That we will not forsake the assembling of ourselves together nor omit the great duty of prayer both for ourselves and others –

That we will participate in each other’s joys and endeavor with tenderness and sympathy to bear each other’s burdens and sorrows –

That (we) will seek Divine aid to enable us to walk circumspectly and watchfully in the work, denying ungodliness and every worldly lust –

That we will strive together for the support of a faithful and evangelical Ministry among us and to spread the gospel abroad –

That we will through life, amidst evil report and good report, seek to live to the glory of him who hath called us out of darkness into his marvelous light.

Brethren, whether we rewrite it with Scripture citations, or simply read the Scriptures and determine to work together under their principles – a better grasp of adherence to our “covenant relationship” with local church members could do much to eliminate church fusses, and put us to work for the Lord.

Guardian of Truth XXXVI: 15, p. 453
August 6, 1992