Truth Magazine

By Jerry Fite

Examples illustrate. They form salient points to which the mind connects for a clearer understanding of truth. Examples are helpful sign posts pointing the observer in the right direction. While the Old Testament sign posts of divorce are not pleasant to look upon, they do give proper direction to the godly mind. While we are not under the Old Testament Law, the following examples will help us grasp hold of principles that do pertain to marriages today, under the law of Christ.

Metaphorically, God was Israel’s husband. With the death of Solomon, Israel became a divided kingdom. Jeroboam led the northern ten tribes into idolatry, that perpetuated throughout its two hundred nineteen year history. The prophets Isaiah, Amos, Hosea and Micah pleaded for reform to no avail. Finally, in 722 B.C. God’s patience gave way to his justified wrath, and he dispersed the northern kingdom into Assyrian captivity. By sending Israel away, God metaphorically divorced his wife.

Reflecting on this divorce, Isaiah speaks, “Thus saith the Lord, Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement, whom I have put away? Or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away” (Isa. 50:1). Isaiah assures the children of Israel that this divorce was not caused by a capricious husband. He was not a husband who, on a whim, placed the bill of divorcement in his wife’s hand to send her away. There was cause for this divorce, but only on the part of Israel.

Later, when Judah was following in the steps of her unfaithful sister, Jeremiah says, “And I saw, when, for this very cause that backsliding Israel had committed adultery, I had put her away and given her a bill of divorcement, yet treacherous Judah her sister feared not; but she also went and played the harlot” (Jer. 3:8). God looked at Israel’s idolatry as adultery, and for this cause sent her away with the bill of divorcement.

These metaphors reflect the mind of God. First, his desire is not to divorce. He asks Israel, where is the bill of divorcement that reveals my desire to be rid of you forever? Second, God sees adultery as a just cause for divorce. God tells Judah that he put Israel away because of her adultery. In the first metaphor, Isaiah implies that there is no bill of divorcement, for there is no desire on God’s part to divorce. In the second example, Jeremiah says that there is a bill of divorcement because there is just cause – adultery.

In 458 B.C., Ezra led a group of Israelites back to Jerusalem. Hearts, buoyed with joy and anticipation, were soon deflated when Ezra learned that God’s people had taken foreign wives (Ezra 9:1-2).

The “holy seed” of Israel was not to mingle with “the people of the lands.” In taking the daughters of these foreigners for wives, they violated a clear command of God (Deut. 7:3). The sons and nephews of the high priest, the Levites, one singer, four porters of the temple, and other Israelites were guilty. They were all in unlawful marriages.

In the midst of the rainy season, the solution was clear. They “must put away all the wives and such as are born of them” (Ezra 10:3). Despite human opposition (Ezra 10:15), the arduous task of examining the matter began. Within three months, 114 unlawful marriages were settled (Ezra 10:16-17).

Ezra commanded the people to confess their sin (Ezra 10:11). The priests offered a sacrificial lamb for their guilt (Ezra 10:19). However, God was not pleased until they separated themselves from the people of the land and the foreign women (Ezra 10:11). The marriages were unlawful, therefore the men had to put away their foreign wives.

Ezra reveals that “some of them had wives by whom they had children” (Ezra 10:44). But this did not change the divine solution. Remember, they were also to 44 put away” those “born” of the unlawful marriages (Ezra 10:3).

The Israelites of Ezra’s day knew that if a relationship were sinful, the relationship must end. No one was excused. A confession and a sin offering were not enough to please God. Each man also had to put away his foreign wife. An unlawful marriage had to end, even when the union produced offspring.

Approximately twenty-five years later, Nehemiah and the prophet Malachi faced the same sin of Israel marrying foreign women. Horror stories ensued. Their mixed marriages produced children who spoke a mixed language, adulterating the language spoken by the Jews (Neh. 13:24). One of the high priest’s sons married a daughter of Sanballat the Horonite, an enemy of God’s people (Neh. 13:28; cf. 2:10,19). No sweet savor arose from the altar, for the tears, weeping and sighing of the divorced Hebrew wives extinguished the sacrificial flame before God (Mal. 2:13). The tragedy was not just the trespass against God in marrying foreign women (Neh. 13:27), but the treacherous act of divorcing one’s wife.

Malachi stresses that marriage is a covenant witnessed by God, and divorce is the act that shows one not keeping his promise. “Jehovah hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously, though she is thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant” (Mal. 2:14).

Malachi seeks to awaken the godly spirit. True, marrying foreign women was unlawful, but what about the prior act of divorcing one’s wife? One had not been unfaithful to a mere acquaintance, but he had turned his back on his companion from youth – his wife. Is there not a residue of God’s spirit left in anyone? If so, one will surely not “deal treacherously against the wife of his youth” by divorcing her (Mal. 2:15). If one is still slumbering in ambivalence, Malachi echoes a cry from heaven, “I hate putting away, saith Jehovah” (Mal. 2:16).

While Nehemiah spoke out against unlawful marriages, Malachi cried out against divorce. Our generation today needs to hear the same balanced teaching. Many are quick to decry the unlawful second marriage, but are not as equally adamant against the first divorce. Tuned with God, you will hate divorce. Just calling it unfortunate will not suffice. Like God, you will regard divorce as unfaithfulness, and accurately call it treachery.

The last Old Testament example of divorce and remarriage is found in the New Testament. Herodias left her husband Herod Philip and married Herod Antipas (Mk. 6:17). John the Baptist went to prison because he told Herod Antipas, “It is not lawful for thee to have her” (Matt. 14:4). For a while Herod Antipas kept the righteous John safe (Mk. 6:20), but finally Herodias took advantage of her daughter’s pleasing dance (Matt. 14:6), Herod’s rash promise (Matt. 14:7), and succeeded in having John’s head on a platter (Matt. 14:8,10-11).

The Law of Moses stated, “Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother’s wife: it is thy brother’s nakedness” (Lev. 18:16). Since Herodias was Herod’s “brother Philip’s wife” (Matt. 14:3), some consider this to be merely an incestuous sin. However, we need to also stress that it was not incestuous because one had married his brother’s daughter, for Philip married his niece Herodias, but that Herod had married his brother’s wife. Actual divorce, and remarriage did not change the fact that Herodias belonged with Philip.

John was cast into prison because he “had been saying” (NAS) that Herod had no right to Herodias (Matt. 14:4). The imperfect tense probably indicates that John spoke repeatedly against his unlawful union. John’s persistence in driving home the point that the marriage of Herodias and Herod was unlawful, drove John into prison.

Conclusion

There are no easy solutions to unlawful marriages. If Herod and Herodias could have apologized before God with godly sorrow, while being allowed to remain married, surely they would have so opted. But as in Ezra’s day, the only remedy for unlawful marriages is separation. Unwilling to change their unlawful relationship, they silenced their accuser.

These Old Testament examples provide firm footing in the midst of emotional times. God does not look upon putting away one’s mate in the same light as separating oneself from an unlawful marriage. While God hates divorce (Mal 2:16), he demanded that his people “put away” their foreign wives (Ezra 10:3). While one may not fathom how God could tolerate the tears resulting from disrupting a second marriage, Malachi reminds us that God felt the sorrow resulting from the first divorce (Mal. 2:13). Where was the abhorrence for tears then? God did demand that unlawful marriages end, even when the unions had produced children (Ezra 10:3,44). Following God’s example as a husband, the godly mind will never initiate divorce (Isa. 50:1), except the cause of adultery (Jer. 3:8). Finally, a godly man persistent in crying out against an unlawful marriage (Matt. 14:4), being silenced only by death (Matt. 14:10).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 1, pp. 23-24
January 4, 1990

By Ron Halbrook

The book of Judges records the cycles of apostasy which afflicted the people of God in the Old Testament. The New Testament is full of warnings about the working; of the leaven of error and the coming of a great spirit of apostasy, all of which has come to pass in the history of the church of our Lord. During the week of 6-12 March 1989 it was my privilege to labor in a gospel meeting with the fine Westview church of Christ in Hartselle, Alabama. Jeff Archer is a younger man devoted to preaching the gospel who is doing a steady and sound work with these good Christians. I stayed in the home of long-time friends, Kenny and Linda Mitchell, who gave me a book entitled A Light On a Hill. History of the Church of Christ, Hartselle, Alabama, 1920-1983 (privately published by Lista D. Martin, May 1984). This book contains much interesting historical information, including a section on the division over institutionalism from the viewpoint of the book’s liberal author. The book is reasonably objective for the most part, and reflects the cycles of apostasy which have afflicted the church of our Lord in America.

Planting the Church: Hard Work and Hard Times

In the 1920s there was an apostate group known as the Christian Church meeting in Hartselle. For four weeks during part of June and July 1920, J. Petty Ezell, John T. Lewis, and C.M. Pullias preached in a “protracted meeting” under a tent in Hartselle (p. 1). As a result the church of Christ began to meet on 17 July. After meeting in a house for several months, the church completed its own small building and met in it from October of 1920 through November of 1947. The author states concerning this simple structure:

The location was inconvenient, with little, if any parking space – even for wagons. The only heat in winter months came from a coal-burning stove. The lighting was provided by one ceiling light. There were no separate classrooms, no carpet, no water fountain, no modern bathrooms, and no PA system. They had no air-conditioning – the members had to bring their own hand fans! (p. 5)

During one difficult period in the early days of the church, the “two Pewter cups” were prepared for the Lord’s Supper but only one or two men were attending the services. “They were not members or would not serve the Lord’s table. The men would leave the building and Mrs. Shaw would serve the Lord’s Supper to the ladies” (p. 10). During the 1920s some men who worked as local evangelists with the church include J.C. Dixon, W.O. Norton, and B.F. Moody. Brother Robert Farrish held a gospel meeting in 1931. “5 added by confession and baptism” (p. 14; cf. p. 18).

The 1930s were overshadowed by the economic depression. When the bank failed in March 1933, each depositor received 5 percent of its account. “The church received $2.85” (p. 20). Many people walked from state to state searching for work from house to house begging food. The author recalls a beggar at her parents’ door being asked to cut wood for the cookstove in return for food. “He was asked to fill the box while Mother prepared his food. Hours following his departure, we discovered he cut only enough pieces to cover the top of the bin making it appear full. Mother said he would reap a just reward! ” (p. 16) Funerals were often held in the homes. “Friends would sit all night with the deceased” (p. 23). Lindsey Allen performed a wedding ceremony 16 December 1938 for Homer Sherrill and Bernice Walling. Curtains were hung to divide the meetinghouse into four classrooms. “They were hung by a cord that could be drawn open for worship services and closed for Sunday School” (p. 24).

Emphasis on the Bible Pattern

In July 1944, the church was charged one dollar to use the baptistry of the First Christian Church! Frank Andrews came to preach for the church in December of 1944. A new building was completed while brother Andrews was there in November of 1947. An excerpt from the deed for the land on Sparkman Street included the following statement.

That the congregation on worshiping in the house erected on said property tracts, or parcels of land herein described, shall in all work and worship adhere and conform strictly to New Testament pattern, rejecting and opposing all inventions, doctrines, and commandments of men, such as societies, conventions, associations, etc., fairs, shows, suppers, etc., for the purpose of raising money, or games or instruments of music (neither used or housed) in the worship, visionary, speculative, and division teaching or things not clearly revealed and that none of these things or other things like unto them shall be used or taught on or about said premises (p. 30).

On 16 November 1947 a gospel meeting began as the brethren moved into the new building. The following speakers and subjects were announced.

A Glorious Church, by O.S. Lanham

Christ and the Church, by R.L. Andrews

The Mission of the Church, by J. Hollis Robinson

Church Membership and its Responsibility, by E. Patton

The Purity of the Church, by Charles Chumley

Church Government, by T.A. Thompson

Topic to be Announced, by R.D. Underwood (p. 32).

These subjects speak for themselves as to the emphasis given to the importance of the New Testament pattern of teaching on the true church. The records of the church show that Frank Andrews was paid $225 for the month of November. The church treasury was $63.24 in the hole for that month. Times were still very hard.

Among the preachers who labored with this church in the 1950s was Roy Fudge (June 1957-August 1958). A new building was erected in August 1960 and a larger auditorium added in August 1972.

Apostasy, Division and Starting Over

On pages 63-69 the author includes a section entitled “Division in the Church.”

For years the harmony in congregations across the nation was disturbed by various controversial matters to include the support of orphan homes, fellowship suppers, support of the Herald of Truth Radio Program, Christian Colleges and various other picayune subjects. Those against this type support were called “antis”; those for were known as “liberals” (p. 63).

In April of 1963 the elders had a series of lessons presented for a week promoting and defending the liberal practices. The speakers were George Marshall, Charles Stidham, Winford Clark, Steril Watson, and most importantly Gus Nichols, who spoke on “The Work of Benevolence and Cooperation by the Church.”

When the elders refused a request to have speakers from the opposing viewpoint, three families submitted letters withdrawing their fellowship and began to conduct their worship as a new church. “As days passed, other families left to unite with the original three. The church lost a total of eight families” (p. 64). The elders wrote and read a letter to the church withdrawing from the original three on the charge of disturbing the peace of the church.

The author includes the texts of the three letters, omitting the names of the writers (whose names I learned while at Westview). The first letter was written by brother and sister Kenneth Swafford and included the following statements.

This congregation has allowed error to creep in so gradually (which has always been true of digression) that we are in a state of lethargy, where we can soothe our consciences into thinking that almost anything is alright if done in the right spirit. Such thinking for years past has produced good religious people in denominations.

History is repeating itself. About 100 years ago, and even fewer years here in the South, the Church was split asunder because people lost sight of the simple Word of God and wanted to build up for themselves institutions bigger and stronger than the local congregation. Please read church history and see that the same arguments put forth for digression in that day are used today by the liberal element to teach their digression. Brethren it is a fearful thing for which each one of us will have to give an accounting before God. None of these institutions is found in the Bible (pp. 65-66).

The other two letters were from brother Marlin Chapman and from brother and sister Jimmy Roberts.

Just as the church had begun in Hartselle in 1920, on 24 April 1963 twenty-two persons met in the home of brother and sister M.H. Chapman and formed the Westview church of Christ. They moved into their new building in December of 1963. A picture of the new building along with a brief article about the new church appeared in the Decatur Daily of 29 August 1964. These good brethren are continuing to contend earnestly for the faith and to spread the gospel in Hartselle.

Within forty years of the time the church first began in Hartselle, a new cycle of apostasy had occurred. It is striking that the innovations promoted in the late 50s and early 60s are explicitly condemned in the property deed of 1947. Within fifteen years of that statement, brethren had drifted to the point that they could not see they were violating the principles which they had stated so firmly and plainly a generation earlier. As the result of a lack of teaching or else a lack of hearing, “there arose another generation after them, which knew not the Lord, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel” (Judg. 2:10). The experience of Hartselle was repeated all across America. Have we learned anything?

What Does the Future Hold?

If we do not teach the whole counsel of God in our time or if brethren fail to take heed to it, another cycle of compromise and apostasy will appear to afflict the people of God again. Congregations which began in the 1950s and 1960s in an effort to purify the church from false doctrine are approaching thirty and forty years of age. Not too long ago, a young couple admitted to the elders of the Lord’s church that they did not understand the real principles involved in the division over liberalism and asked if some sermons could be presented on the matter. The elders answered, “We had plenty of preaching on that subject twenty years ago and do not need to hear about it again now.” A faithful Christian in another large congregation recently said that nearly all of the younger couples wear shorts in public and go mixed swimming.

There is some healthy growth taking place in many churches but in others there is too much swelling and bloating in the name of growth. When preachers spout people pleasing platitudes rather than to “reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine,” the church is soon filled with people who have “itching ears” and who “turn away their ears from the truth . . . unto fables” (2 Tim, 4:1-5). False, dangerous, and divisive theories are being taught on marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Some are saying in effect, “I don’t believe such error but surely we can work out a formula of fellowship which will accommodate it.”

Brethren, if we are to avoid and avert apostasy, we must renew within us the spirit of the ancient prophets and apostles. “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet” (Isa. 58:1). “His word was in thine heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not stay” (Jer. 20:9). May our fearless presentation of the gospel and our pressing the demands of truth without fear or favor for even our best friends cause those who hear to remember “that it was written, the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up” (Jn. 2:17). This must ever be our resolve, “I am set for the defense of the gospel” (Phil. 2:17). We must never forget the charge, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season” (2 Tim. 4:2).

Let us pray that God will help us to resist indifference and apathy. May we feed upon his Word and fill our hearts with it until we despise every form of sin and error (Psa. 119:104). When politicians and policy formulators try to intimidate us with lectures about our lack of love, may God help us to respond, “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments” (1 Jn. 5:2). Trusting in God’s grace and in the power of his Word in the face of every trial and crisis, may we so labor that we can say with the apostle at the end of the way,

I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing (2 Tim. 4:7-8).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 2, pp. 42-44
January 18, 1990

By Vernon Love

God appeared to Moses in the burning bush and told him to go back to Egypt and lead Israel to the promised land. “Then Moses answered and said, ‘But suppose they will not believe me or listen to my voice; suppose they say, “the Lord has not appeared to you.”‘ So the Lord said to him, ‘What is that in your hand?’ And he said, ‘A rod.'”

Moses was taught a lesson that day that when the rod was put into God’s service, it will accomplish what God wanted to be done. It was one of the signs to prove that God had appeared to Moses.

Let’s search the Bible and find what others had in-their hand that God was able to use for his glory.

We find David with a “sling” in his hand (1 Sam. 17). When it was used in the service of God, it was used to kill Goliath who had defied God and his army.

Jesus saw a great multitude coming and they found a “lad” with five loaves and two small fish. Jesus took them and blessed them and fed 5,000 men besides women and children. It seemed so little, but in Christ’s hand, it became more than enough to feed the multitude and have twelve full baskets left over (Matt. 14:13-21). Jesus saw a widow casting in “two mites.” She had given all she had, and Jesus used her to teach a lesson of how to give (Mk. 12:41-44).

Let’s ask some others, what is in their hand? “Alien sinner, what is that in your hand?” Is it things of this world that will perish (1 Jn. 2:15-17)? Is it “pleasures of sin” (Heb. 11:25)? Turn from the world and all its pleasures and turn to God. “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle” (Col. 2:21).

“Backsliding Christian, what is that in your hand?” “Is it sins of the past you used to do? Is it beer, wine or whiskey?”‘ “Is it cigarettes or tobacco of some form?” “Is it vulgar books or magazines?” “It is PG, R, or X-rated video movies?” Repent of all these worldly things and pray to God for forgiveness (Acts 8:22; Jas. 5:16).

“Faithful Christian, what is that in your hand?” “Is it a Bible to read and study each day?” “Is it a Bible to teach a lost soul about their Savior?” “Is it some food or clothes to take to the poor?” “Is it a telephone to call the weak, discouraged or those who missed services?” “Is it a card or a letter to send to the visitors who came to services?”

There is so much work to do, and so few hands who are willing to do it. What would you be able to say if God asked you, “What is that in your hand?”

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 2, p. 44
January 18, 1990

By Harry R. Osborne

When brother Willis asked me to prepare this special issue, I understood the highly controversial nature of the subject. It is no secret that brethren across this country do not speak as one voice on this issue. At the age of sixteen, that fact became clear to me. As a teenager, I saw the horrible consequences of brethren teaching and practicing different doctrines on this subject in the local church of which I was a member. I saw with a broken heart the fruits of adultery and broken homes that came from false teaching on this subject. Years have passed since those sad days, but the tragic results of differences between brethren over divorce and remarriage have only become more evident and distressing. In almost every local congregation across this country, the issues in this realm of study are being discussed. Congregations are beginning to divide at an increasing rate.

Brethren, it should be obvious that we need to study the various facets of this subject diligently. This special issue has been designed to aid in that task. The topics are arranged into four major divisions so as to challenge us to think and study upon the subject as we seek unity on the basis of the truth.

(1) Introductory articles

(2) Exegetical studies

(3) Historical perspectives

(4) Refutation of errors

I believe the truth has been taught and hope it will be carefully and prayerfully considered. My thanks go to each writer for his time and effort expended in this task.

As brother Cavender so eloquently stated in his introduction, the responsibility for determining the truth on this issue and the application thereof to our fellowship rests with each local church and each individual Christian. Each local church will face decisions about the lawful bounds of their fellowship and they must apply the teaching of God’s word. Each of us will face situations in which we must determine whom we will receive as a brother or sister in Christ. Those decisions are our responsibility. No man, group of men, paper or school has the right to create a line of fellowship not drawn by the Scripture. Nor does any man, group of men, paper or school have the right to erase a line of fellowship which is drawn by the Scripture. We must “speak as the Bible speaks and be silent where it is silent” on this and every other matter of faith, if we are to walk worthily of our calling and keep the unity of the Spirit (Eph. 4:1-3). If we go beyond Christ’s doctrine in our fellowship, we will forsake our fellowship with him (2 Jn. 9-11).

In recent months, some brethren who claim they believe the truth have taken exception to those who have tried to teach that truth and oppose error on this subject. Some objections have arisen from the identifying of well-known and respected gospel preachers who have taught errors regarding divorce and remarriage. Other objections have been based on the manner in which the errors were opposed. We must remember the example of Bible writers who named both the error and the teacher of the error in their attempts to counteract the soul-damning effects of false teaching. Let us never become so attached to any man that we sit in silence while the error taught leads souls to remain in a sinful practice and be lost eternally. There is no doubt that all of us make mistakes in our judgment as we uphold truth and oppose error. If the reader sees a better way to oppose and expose the errors reviewed in this issue, please correct our mistakes and do it right. May we all hear the words of our faithful brother, Connie W. Adams, in a recent article (Searching The Scriptures [Nov. 19891, Vol. 30, No. 11, pp. 539-540) exhorting us in this matter:

Whether we used good judgment in such identification is now a moot point. The fact is, the pernicious doctrine is being taught, souls are being encouraged to remain in adultery, the peace of local churches is being disrupted. When you fellows get your noses back in joint, would you please take up the sword of the Spirit and help to expose this doctrine for what it is and warn of the devastating moral consequences? Do you really believe that adultery is a matter of indifference with God? That one may, or may not, practice it without divine approval or disapproval? I know how you will answer it. And when you do, you will have to remove it from the realm of things considered in Romans 14. If you know a better way to approach the problem, then by all means do it, but please approach the problem. “Speak thou the things which become sound doctrine” (Tit. 2:11).

To that I have but one comment, “Amen!”

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 1, p. 28
January 4, 1990