Truth Magazine

By Bobby Witherington

In Proverbs 14:34 the wise man said, “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to (any) people.” That this statement is true can be verified by studying the history of the nation of Israel in Old Testament times. When they forsook idols and turned to God, and embraced the principles of righteousness set forth in God’s law, they invariably prospered and were abundantly blessed in so many ways. But when they forsook the law of God, and turned to idols, they invariably suffered dire consequences – consequences which included the disfavor of God, loss of self-respect, loss of the respect of the nations around them, loss of life, and loss of freedom by being conquered and taken captive by those nations. Though our own nation has never been a “Christian nation” (as some have mistakenly described it), it has in times past been a nation where decency, personal responsibility, moral uprightness, and respect for proper authority were upheld. And who could deny that, in the process, this nation was blessed in so many ways?

But times have changed! Some of us can remember when a person could walk unafraid and unmolested upon the streets of most any major city. But now crime has invaded even the lonely rural areas, and violence in small towns is quite common. We have a moral crisis in America! This fact is confirmed every time one hears the evening news or, for that matter, takes a look at the TV guide in order to see the kind of programs which society now allows piped into its homes.

How did this moral crisis come about? Doubtlessly much of our moral crisis has been implemented by many social changes – changes which have removed the word “sin” from our collective vocabulary, and which have given a degree of respectability to homosexuals, lesbians, and other immoral degenerates. Without a doubt, much of today’s moral crisis has been aided and abetted by a liberal interpretation of the law, even to the point of showing more respect for the rights of criminals than for their victims!

Not for one moment would we knowingly minimize the tragic effects wrought upon society by any of the aforementioned realms of influence with regard to today’s moral crisis. However, we suggest that the real culprit as to the major cause of society’s present moral crisis has yet to be mentioned. We affirm that the weakening of society’s moral standards has largely been proportionate to, and contemporary with, the weakening of the home. We further affirm that today’s escalation of crime has been simultaneous with the escalation of divorce, and that the place to begin in our efforts to save our nation from destruction is in the family circle.

With this belief, I merely introduce the theme I plan to discuss – a theme which pertains to the home and to the family circle.

Divine Origin of Marriage

“And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him. . . . And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.’ Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Gen. 2:18,21-24).

The verses which we just read set forth the divine origin of marriage and the marriage relationship. It was God who said, “It is not good that the man should be alone.” It was God who said, “I will make him a helper comparable to him.” It was God who performed the first surgery as he took a rib from Adam’s side, from which he made woman. It was from henceforth God’s will that a man “leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife.” It was God’s will that the husband and wife become “one flesh.” Other Scriptures reveal that this husband-wife relationship was divinely designed to provide companionship, happiness, the procreation of mankind, and to serve as the very foundation of society itself.

Morally speaking, we have reached a crisis point in America. This fact is too well known, and too well documented, for me to take your time in attempting to prove. But what so many seem to overlook is the fact that our national moral crisis is tied in with our national divorce rate. The home and the family have always been the very bedrock of society, and out of families have always come the men and the morals that shaped and determined the destiny of nations. God designed the home to be the cradle of civilization and, historically speaking, the home has been the bulwark of nations. But the home, which was thus divinely conceived and designed, has in our society been neglected by husbands, deserted by wives, and despised by children. Please do not misunderstand; I do not believe the whole country has gone to the dogs. Most people are basically good, law-abiding folks. However, even among this basically good, law-abiding number, the family circle is often a broken circle, and an attitude of despair prevails.

A weakening of the home means a weakening of society in general, a weakening of our nation, and, yes, the weakening of the church. It is impossible to build strong churches out of weak homes, for no church can rise above the level of quality that characterizes the families that constitute the temple of God. However, it is not enough to just bemoan the moral and domestic crisis which has engulfed our nation. We must also study and learn ways to cope with this crisis, to do what we can to halt the deterioration of family life, to meet the challenge of our present crisis, and to bring greater joy and happiness in our own daily lives. The Lord willing, I shall pursue this important subject in the light of the Scriptures in future articles.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 15, pp. 450, 471
August 1, 1991

By David V. Hurst

Do you ever get to feeling that the “church” where you attend doesn’t really need you? Do you feel that your presence and efforts have no effect at all? Do you then ask yourself what difference does it make whether you attend? Immediately you know the “pat” answer. The preacher says “you are important and it is important that you use your talents well.” He says, “What you do or don’t do effects the entire congregation.” But isn’t this a little hard to swallow? Aren’t you a little skeptical when you hear this? Can you really believe that this is the straight forward honest truth? Let’s reason this out together.

Biblically, each saint is compared to a member of a single body (1 Cor. 12). Most of us can understand the illustration. Literally, no matter what aspect of one’s body is hurt or incapacitated, the whole body suffers. From a scratch or hangnail to a broken arm or leg, one will have pain, discomfort, and at the very least, temporary lack of productivity. Paul teaches that this is the way it is in the church. Why do we have trouble applying this?

I am reminded of an incident in my own family. It was late and the girls had all gotten ready for bed. Sure, they are supposed to be sweet, unrowdy girls but nothing would do them unless they got their dad into a squirt gun fight. So they were the good guys and Dad became the villain. Around the house and up and down the stairs water went, swishing, splatting, and finding its mark. Dad’s wife who normally would have been upset at the mess created seemed to watch in motherly pleasure. During the course of the battle one of the girls knocked Mom’s “candle sconce” on to the floor. It was made of iron and was not hurt. A few moments later, the worst happened. Our middle daughter stepped or the iron sconce and it cut deeply into her toe and foot. It took several stitches.

Who was to blame? It could have all been avoided if Dad had just stopped and told the girls to wait while we cleared the floor. If Mom had just taken the time to get up and pick it up while we went on playing it could have been avoided. If my daughter had picked it up when she knocked it off or if her older sister had been willing to take the time to do the same, it would have been avoided. A major trauma could have been avoided if one person had done what seemed to be an insignificant act – an act that would have no doubt gone unnoticed. Yes, the whole family was to blame. Still, some of us who were older should have seen the danger and the greater responsibility falls upon us. Further, Dad and Mom were in charge and we bear even greater responsibility. Yet, if any one of us had done our little part in being helpful, the whole incident would have been avoided.

In the spiritual realm, many things often go unattended because they are unnoticed or seem insignificant. No doubt, we would be shocked by the problems that arise simply because we feel our efforts are too unimportant to make a difference. As in the illustration above, the church also is a family. Similarly, some are older, some are wiser, and some may have responsibility over more than some of the others in the family. However, the welfare of any member of the family is often dependent upon “each and every” other member of the family. We are too quick to overlook the little things and assign them as being unimportant. We also assume we are unnoticed and therefore unimportant, but this does not follow to be true. Little things make up big things. To give someone a call, to visit an elderly Christian, to greet a visitor, to pick up someone and bring him to services and hundreds more things could be mentioned that have the potential of just being the encouraging thought to help keep another soul close to God. There are so many seemingly insignificant things that we all can do.

God is glorified through the preaching of the Gospel. How do we do that? Who is to do it? You say, “the church.” Who is that? Is it not the preacher? Yes, in part. But the teacher, the elder, as well as each and every Christian all have their part in this work. Each Christian’s part is as important as that of the next Christian. What happens when each person does not do what he can do? One is reminded of the old parable of the horse being lost for the want of a nail in his shoe. As Christians, why do we overlook the significance of our presence in an assembly? It has often been, that a struggling saint being in an assembly has been one of the greatest encouragements to continue fighting on for his fellows. When Christians get together and unite in effort (no matter how insignificant mine may seem) the only result will be in souls being saved to the glorifying of almighty God.

God spent so much upon the church in giving it life through the blood of his own Son that it behooves me to consider my thinking. Why did God do that? It is because I am created in his image. I am important to him. How can I not be in each assembly ready to give all I have whether great or small to help others in doing our best to glorify our Father?

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 14, p. 430
July 18, 1991

By Mike Willis

A second prescription for good spiritual health in the face of bleak circumstances is given in Philippians 4:5 – “Let your moderation be known unto all men.”

The word “moderation” is a translation of the Greek adjective epieikes. To understand what character trait Paul is commanding demands that we do a word study. The word is used in a legal sense in secular Greek. It refers to the ability to set aside the letter of the law in order to give special consideration to mitigating circumstances in settling affairs (see Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 11:589). The word points to a man who has the letter of the law on his side but who does not insist that the demands of the letter of the law be met because of his moderate disposition and considerate leniency.

R.C. Trench emphasized that the word “expresses exactly that moderation which recognizes the impossibility of cleaving to all formal law, of anticipating and providing for all cases that will emerge, and present themselves to it for decision; which, with this, recognizes the danger that ever waits upon the assertion of legal rights, lest they should be pushed into moral wrongs … which, therefore, urges not its own rights to the uttermost, but, going back in part or in the whole from these, rectifies and redresses the injustices of justice” (Synonyms of the New Testament 154).

William Barclay commented along the same line:

The basic and the fundamental thing about epieikeia is that it goes back to God. If God stood on His rights, if God applied to us nothing but the rigid standards of law, where would we be? God is the supreme example of one who is epieikes and who deals with others with epieikeia.

It may be hard to translate this word, but it is not hard to see the clamant need of the quality which it describes. We live in a society where men insist on standing on their legal rights, where they will do only what they are compelled to do, and where they desire to make others do all that they can compel them to do. Again and again we have seen congregations torn by strife and reduced to tragic unhappiness because men and women, committees and courts stood on the letter of the law (A New Testament Wordbook 39).

As I read these definitions, I remember the parable of the two debtors in Matthew 18:23-35. The parable relates that a lord had a debtor who owed him 10,000 talents. He commanded that the debtor and his family be sold as slaves. When the debtor asked for compassion, the lord forgave him his debt. Later this debtor met a fellow slave who owed him 100 pence. He demanded that his fellow servant pay his debt. He fellow servant asked for mercy and time to repay, using the same words as the man who had owed 10,000 talents had used in asking mercy from his lord. The man refused to show mercy; he had his fellow servant cast into prison until the debt was paid. Of course, this man was exacting the letter of the law. Nevertheless, the Lord condemned him, using this as an example to teach us to forgive others even as God has forgiven us.

The shorter definitions of the word include such descriptions of the character trait commanded by moderation as follows: “mildness, gentleness, fairness, equitable, fair mild” (Thayer 238), “clemency, gentleness, graciousness . . . yielding, gentle, kind, your forbearing spirit” (Arndt and Gingrich 292). Some commentaries add such comments as the following:

Macknight: Moderation means that meekness under provocation, readiness to forgive injuries, equity in the management of business, candor in judging of the characters and actions of others, sweetness of disposition, and entire government of the passions (Philippians 465).

A.T. Robertson: “your gentleness,” “your sweet reasonableness” (IV:459).

Kenneth Wuest: not being unduly rigorous, being satisfied with less than one’s due, sweet reasonableness, forbearance (11:109).

Fritz Rienecker: reasonableness in judging. The word signifies a humble, patient steadfastness, which is able to submit to injustice, disgrace, and maltreatment without hatred and malice, trusting in God in spite of it all (A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament 11:214).

Having these definitions and comments before us, now let us make the application.

In order to have good spiritual health, especially in the midst of adversities, there are several principles by which we must live.

1. We must recognize that life is not always fair. Our sense of justice might lead us to think that we always will get what we deserve in life. That is not true. Christians are sometimes persecuted as a consequence of their doing righteousness (1 Pet. 4:16).

2. We must not allow life’s injustices to embitter us. One temptation the Devil uses to destroy men’s souls is to fill them with bitterness because of wrong suffered. The Christian must be careful not to allow his heart to fester over injustices as a result of which he becomes embittered.

Some men destroy themselves by brooding over past inequities. A church occasionally may mistreat a member (cf. 3 Jn. 9-10). Having imperfect people composing its membership, a church sometimes errs. On some occasions, the victim will quit serving the Lord altogether rather than manifesting that “patient steadfastness, which is able to submit to injustice, disgrace, and maltreatment without hatred and malice, trusting in God in spite of it all.” Without defending the sin committed against the victim, we nevertheless emphasize the weakness of character which quits serving God as a result of injustice.

3. We must manifest a yielding spirit in getting along with our fellow man. Lest someone misunderstand this point, let me state that we cannot compromise the truths of the gospel for the sake of unity. However, our attitude in getting along with others with whom we differ must be bending and yielding. We must not insist on our personal rights at the expense of brotherly love.

The Scripture says, “Let your moderation be known unto all men.” It can only be known as men see this disposition manifested by repeated acts of gentleness and self-restraint. A Christian must manifest a yielding disposition, in contrast to self-assertion of personal rights.

Self-assertion and assertion of rights may yield a temporary and personal victory. However, it ultimately leads to greater problems. A second pill in the prescription of good spiritual health is developing the character trait represented by the word “moderation.”

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 14, 418, 438
July 18, 1991

By John A. Smith

Joseph Resists Temptation

No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it (1 Cor. 10:13).

Satan cannot defeat us unless we surrender. This can be easily seen in the life of Joseph. “No temptation could overcome his high-toned morality, no calamity could shake his implicit faith in God. Adversity in its bitterest form did not unduly depress him, and neither did the giddiest height of prosperity generate unseemly pride. In his father’s house he was pampered and fondled; in slavery wantonly and falsely accused; in the palace wielding unlimited power, he was always the same truthful, pure, just, noble-minded, Godfearing man” (W.E. Powers as quoted by C.C. Crawford in Genesis: The Book of Beginnings [Vol. 4], Joplin, MO:College Press, 1971 p. 533).

Joseph Seduced But He Resists

Joseph, sold by his brothers to a group of Midianite traders for 20 pieces of silver, was in turn sold to Potiphar. As captain of the guard, Potiphar was an important officer in Pharaoh’s army. From secular history we learn that Potiphar was also the chief of the executioners. (File that away for now!) As a foreign slave in Potiphar’s house, he no doubt would have been given menial tasks and been kept under close supervision when he first began his service. Whatever he did, regardless of how insignificant it may have been, he did it well. He was cooperative, not rebellious or bitter.

As a slave, Joseph prospered by his God (Gen. 39:1-6). In keeping with the “faithful in a few things; put in charge of many things” principle, Joseph was put in charge of all of Potiphar’s affairs. Joseph would have supervised other servants and employees as well as overseeing finances, business affairs and farms. The only thing withheld was the responsibility for his food. In Egyptian society eating with a foreigner would make one unclean.

Potiphar, although a pagan, saw that Joseph’s God was with him and prospering him. It was clear that Potiphar understood that there was a direct cause/effect relationship between Joseph’s devotion to his God and his success.

Potiphar then began to have some interest in Joseph’s God – perhaps not for the best of reasons, but interest none-the-less.

Propositioned by the Boss’ Wife (Gen. 39:7-10)

Mrs. Potiphar took notice of this well-built, handsome, young hunk (v. 6). He was appealing and offered quite a challenge. Her intentions were clearly sexual. She was bold and forward in asking him to go to bed with her. There was no effort to mask her intentions and desires. If she were so forward in her words, I can only imagine how forward she must have been in her dress and actions. Joseph faced a serious situation. Now, remember that Joseph was a young man with all the passions and desires of youth. Imagine being seduced by an older and prominent woman. I think we can understand how easily Joseph could have been swayed. Yes, Joseph faced a serious situation.

Joseph’s resistance was indeed remarkable. Consider Joseph’s environment: Mrs. Potiphar was his superior. Try to imagine for a moment all the favors Joseph could obtain if he satisfied her fleshly desires. Also, he was surrounded by sexual immorality. Egyptian society was corrupt. Their fascination with sexual immorality makes the immorality of today look like a Sunday afternoon church picnic. Joseph did not have friends who would support him in his noble decision of purity and morality. He was surrounded by filth!

Consider her persistence: day after day she tried to seduce him. This was not a one time seduction. Joseph’s resistance could not be worn down. It seemed that the more persistent she became, the more resistant he became!

Consider also his limited spiritual background: Joseph’s knowledge of God’s law was limited (the Law was some 400 years yet future). If you and I were to find ourselves in Joseph’s sandals, we could call upon a number of wellknown Scriptures which demand sexual purity. We could call to memory the “Ten Commandment Prohibition””Do not commit adultery.” Strength could come from Paul’s admonition to “flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18). But, Joseph did not take advantage of these Scriptures. In fact, he did not have a Bible at all.

What were Joseph’s reasons for resisting Mrs. Potiphar’s advances? First, he would not violate Popiphar’s trust (vv. 8-9). Potiphar had been showing interest in Jehovah and had great respect for Joseph. How would this be affected if Joseph gave in to Mrs. Potiphar’s advances? Potiphar trusted Joseph. In fact Potiphar took no thought for what he had because he knew that it was in good hands. If Joseph decided to give into Mrs. Potiphar’s advances, what would become of this trust? Today someone trusts you. Whether it is your parents, spouse, date, or God, someone trusts you. When trust is broken how is it repaired?

Second, Joseph would not disobey God (v. 9). He valued the approval of God and would not act so as to offend Jehovah. Though he was limited in his knowledge of Jehovah, he had strong moral convictions which he would not violate.

Third, his hormones did not over rule his head and heart. Joseph kept his fleshly desires under control. He had the ability to make choices and exercise self-control. And finally he had a desire for and took advantage of the way of escape provided by the Lord.

Joseph’s resistance brought imprisonment rather than reward (vv. 11-20). To resist and be rewarded is one thing, but to resist and get in trouble is quite another! Had Joseph been thrown into prison for some violation of moral or civil law, this would have been understandable. But, imagine what agony Joseph must have suffered when he knew that he was innocent!

Observations

The temptation was sexual, but as is often the case, Satan used other pressures as well. There would have been the fear of rejection and loss of position. Unlike Joseph, many people today yield to temptation, not because they are overwhelmed, but because of the fear of rejection.

Satan cunningly used legitimate desires to entrap Joseph. As we have observed earlier, sexual activity has its proper place. There is nothing wrong with sexual desires. There is nothing wrong with wanting people to like us or desiring to please others. However, Satan tried to get Joseph to satisfy these legitimate desires in some illegitimate ways.

It is when we are most successful, that we are often the most vulnerable. We may be tempted to let down our guard and thus face a devastating blow. Paul warns, “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). When successful we are often tempted to become self-reliant, thinking that we are stronger than we are.

We won’t resist unless we have a firm conviction. Verse 8 states that Joseph refused. He said no. He was determined, before he met with the temptation, that he would resist in such situations. He knew the value of a good run. 2 Timothy 2:22 and 1 Corinthians 6:18 admonish us to flee fornication. Sexual temptation grows in intensity the longer that we expose ourselves to it. Therefore, wisdom and prudence would have us run from it.

Resistance becomes much more difficult if we constantly subject ourselves to verbal and visual stimuli. Joseph made every effort to avoid contact with Mrs. Potiphar (v. 10). It’s true that we can’t avoid all tempting situations (to do so we would have to leave the world), but we can control our environment. Consider the wise man’s advice to the young man concerning sexual sin: “Remove your way far from her, and do not go near the door of her house” (Prov. 5:8). I have had the opportunity to talk with a number of young people whose lives have been affected by sexual sin. I have asked each of them how he/she could have avoided the sin of fornication. Several answers have been common to, almost all of them. They mentioned such things as: keep all of your clothes on all of the time, avoid dark places, and avoid being alone for long periods of time. (Think about it for a moment: Where are you most likely to be tempted – in the back seat of a car late at night parked at the end of a lonely country road or on the floor of the family room while Mom and Dad sit on the couch watching TV with you? I don’t think that the point is hard to understand!)

Resistance may cost a price with men, but not with God. Joseph paid a painful price for his purity and morality (2 years in prison). But, when we leave Joseph at the end of Genesis he had risen to the pinnacle of political power in Egypt (see Mk. 10:29-30). People may reject us, scoff at us and tell lies about us, trying to make us look bad. But God will never forget our faithfulness.

Young people remember that all is not lost, even if you do stumble and fall. There is forgiveness in Jesus Christ.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 14, pp. 424-425
July 18, 1991