Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

QUESTION:

From Texas: “It is agreed that Christians should marry Christians, but does `only in the Lord’ in 1 Cor. 7:39 mean only a Christian?”

REPLY:

“The wife is bound by the law as long. as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:39). This text and its phrase “only in the Lord” has claimed the energies of Bible students through the years. It is a difficult text in some respects. I do not profess to have all the answers. (I do not even know all the questions!) But with an open mind and Bible we can approach this passage with a sincere desire to know the will of the Lord. When we have dug around the foundations, when we have excavated and mined the precious ore and metal of Divine truth, let us resolve to preach and practice what we have learned.

(1) The Context: In 1 Corinthians Paul spends space responding to items written to him, “Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me” (1 Cor. 7:1; cf. 7:25; 8:1; 12:1; 15:35). We do not know what they had written to him, but the circumstances the Corinthians displayed may have prompted and provoked his utterance, “It is good for a man not to touch (marry-LHR) a woman.” To avoid sexual immorality’ one should marry. Not everyone could be celibate as Paul.(1 Cor. 7:2-9).

Next, Paul discusses Christians married to unbelievers (1 Cor.7:10-16).Had the Corinthians asked him about this? Possibly. Then he comments on maidens, “Now concerning virgins” (1 Cor.7:25). Again, it is likely the Corinthians had asked him about this matter. Thus, this topic with its attendant advice and admonition continues through verse 38. The “So then” of verse 38 is a conclusion of the thought commenced and introduced inverse 25. In verse 39, he refers to the married status. Inverses 10-16, he urged those married to unbelievers not to leave their companions. In verse 12, he says, “Let him not put her (the unbelieving wife-LRH) away.” In verse 13, he says, “Let her not leave him (the unbelieving husband-LRH).” In verse 39, he summarizes the substance of what he stated in verses 12 and 13. “The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth.”Well, Paul, suppose her husband is dead? “But if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to marry whom she will; only in the Lord.” That is, this time, under the circumstances of the “present distress” (vs. 26), you must marry a believer, a Christian, one who is in the Lord.

In this context, Paul is considering a particular situation. Where this circumstance does not obtain, the order cannot be enforced. One should not generalize a specific. Paul goes on to say in verse 40 that he believes a widow should remain unmarried. Why? Because of the “present distress” (vs. 26). Do brethren today encourage widows to remain unmarried? Do we tell widows today they will be “happier” if they remain unmarried? No, but Paul did. If brethren are consistent in their general use of verse 39 when they say every widow in all ages and situations is always bound to marry a Christian, then they should first advise every widow to remain unmarried. If they bind verse 39 in all ages, at all times, why not verse 40? But why did Paul tell the widows then they would be “happier” if they did not remarry? Because at this time marriage was under the handicap of that “present distress.” Under similar circumstances, the same advice should be given today as was given in verse 40, but when that condition is not prevalent, the advice is not extended. Likewise, with verse 39. If a widow marries after her husband dies, let her marry only a believer due to the “present distress,” and the “trouble in the flesh” (vs. 28).

(2) “In The Lord:” The expression “in the Lord” is used several times in 1 Corinthians (1:31; 4:17; 7:22; 7:39; 11:11; 15:58). Each time it refers to a sphere or location. It has reference to place and not to manner.

Conclusion: Some in Corinth wondered and inquired, “Should we put away our unbelieving mates?” And Paul replied, “No, live with them if they be pleased to live with you; however, in the present distress, in this difficult period, if your mate dies and you marry again, marry only a believer. Although, in my judgment, one would be happier, better off, if they just remained unmarried.”

Truth Magazine XIX: 19, p. 290
March 20, 1975

By William C. Sexton

There seems to be a great need in the Lord’s church today for “Spiritual Critics.” There are many critics of the destructive type, who seem to have something of the negative nature to say about a lot of people. But they usually show a deficiency in spirituality, lacking the qualities which would enable them to carry out the Lord’s instructions to the faulty trespassers in an effective manner.

A “critic” in the strictest use indicates a person who attempts to make an objective judging so as to determine both merits and faults. A “spiritual” person is one who is concerned with the eternal well-being of himself and others. He is conscious of his duty and privilege of observing the life of his fellow-citizens in the kingdom of Christ, and when he sees a brother “overtaken in a fault,” he recognizes that it is his job to try to “restore” that brother. He, likewise, realizes that there is danger involved-he may be “tempted” himself and thus fall into the same trap. He is very conscious, also, of the seriousness of the brother’s condition. If not restored, he will lose his soul. If he does not attempt to restore his faulty brother, his soul also then is at stake!

Experience and “use” of the word of righteousness give one the skill to “discern both good and evil” (Heb. 5:11-14). This skill is needed so badly in the, Lord’s church today-on the congregational level, it seems to me. It is not uncommon at all to have a brother talking about the weakness of another, the acts committed by another, to learn that nothing has ever been said to the erroring person, the trespasser. Yet, the Lord’s instructions are clear, to the point, and emphatic regarding the action that is to be taken in this respect.

1. First the trespasser is to be rebuked (Lk. 17:2). He is to be contacted and confronted with the charge “between thee and him alone” (Matt. 18:15).

2. Secondly, the one who has been trespassed against is to take “one or two more” with him and attempt to get the Trespasser to “hear them.” (Matt. 18:16)

3. The third step is to take it and tell it to the “church” hoping that he will “hear the church” and correct his life. (Matt. 18:17)

4. The fourth step is to be taken only “if he neglect to hear the church”; then he is to be considered as a “publican” and a “heathen.”

If the Lord’s plan was followed, by spiritual people, I am sure that before the fourth step was reached in many cases the person who had been “overtaken in a fault” would indeed be restored! But, when the Lord’s plan is neglected and unspiritual people posing as spiritual spread “bad news” all over the community of the “evil” member, Satan is succeeding in destroying the souls of many in hell.

May I therefore impress upon you the need for Spiritual Critics? May I provoke you to consider the potential for advancement in this great field? The rewards are everlasting, possessing qualities that cannot be stolen or transferred; they are reserved in heaven, having the greatest security guards that can be found anywhere. The pay will begin immediately and continue to increase as time passes. However, if you are looking for an “easy buck,” a “prestigious” position, and worldly luxury, then you need not apply. You would be disappointed and you would only disappoint many other people. Will you be a spiritual critic?

Truth Magazine XIX: 18, pp. 285-286
March 13, 1975

By Mike Willis

Socrates’ challenge to “Know thyself!” is as applicable to modern man as it was – to the men of his day. Sometimes in our attention to our own internal problems, we neglect some of the basic doctrines in the Scriptures, such as the Bible doctrine of man. Yet, one’s view of himself is going to affect his moral conduct. Whether consciously or unconsciously, man has a doctrine about himself, The mass media of television is communicating a doctrine of man. In addition to the specials on evolution, such regular series shows as “The Planet of the Apes” teach that man is a product of evolution. According to evolutionary theory, man originated from a one-celled amoeba in an oozy swamp. Since that time, through the operation of chance or the survival of the fittest, man has ascended into what he is today. Some think that man is developing toward some future superman.

Other doctrines of man have emerged, however. The theological liberals and humanists hold this view of man:

“As a return to the Renaissance and to the elements of Greek thought, liberalism stressed the continuity between God and man. In idealistic fashion man was regarded as essentially divine and Innately good. Man’s reason was considered autonomous and accordingly any need of divine revelation was rejected. A Pelgian view of man’s goodness joined forces with an optimistic view of evolutionary progress. Liberalism as a whole was anthropocentric rather than theocentric” (Fred H. Klooster, “The Nature of Man,” Christian Faith and Modern Theology, Carl F. H. Henry, ed., p. 162.-Klooster is writing from a Calvinistic point of view-MW.)

Diametrically opposed to this view of man is the Calvinistic point of view:

“Therefore all of us, who have descended from impure seed, are born infected with the contagion of sin” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, Book II, ch. 1, part 5). “Here I only want to suggest briefly that the whole man is overwhelmed-as a deluge-from head to foot, so that no part is immune from sin and all that proceeds from him is to be imputed to sin” (Ibid., Book II, ch. 1, part 9).

But, what is the Bible doctrine of man? Is man inherently good, morally neutral, or inherently evil? What is man?

A Creation of God

First of all, we must affirm that man is a creation of God. In Gen. 2:7, Moses said, “Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being-NASB.”This fact about man is antithetical to the evolutionary theory and liberal theological view of man. Evolution teaches that man has ascended from lower orders of animals; the Bible teaches that man is a creation of God. Man is not a superior form of animal life merely because he has a greater capacity for adjustment. We did not become such as we are by accident; God created us as we are.

In the Image of God

Secondly, man is created in the image of God. Moses also recorded, “Then God said, `Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Gen. 1:26, 27). Compare the following statements by Leupold, and Keil and Delitzsch, about the meaning of “image of God”:

“He lists the following items as belonging to the outward side of the divine image: (a) man’s countenance which directs his gaze upwards; (b) a capacity for varying facial expressions; (c) a sense of shame expressing itself in the blush of man; (d) speech. It cannot be denied that all these are physical features which are noticeably absent to all animals. To the inner side of the divine image the same author assigns the following items: (a) on the material side of man’s inner make-up stands immortality; (b) on the intellectual side is self-consciousness, reason . . . ; (c) on the voluntative-moral side is the ability to discern good and evil, the freedom of the will, conscience, and the right use of his moral capacities-the most important of all . . . . To sum up from a slightly different angle we should like to append the thought that the spiritual and inner side of the image of God is, without a doubt, the most important one’ (H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, Vol. I, pp. 89-90).

“The image of God consists, therefore, in the spiritual personality of man, though not merely in unity of self-consciousness and self-determination, or in the fact that man was created a consciously free Ego; for personality is merely the basis and form of the divine essence. This consists rather in the fact, that the man endowed with free sell-conscious personality possesses, In his spiritual as well as corporeal nature, a creaturely copy of the holiness and blessedness of the divine life” (C. F. Kell and F. DeHtzsch, Bible Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. I, pp. 63-64).

Although I would not agree totally with either of these comments, they constitute material worth consideration. For example, the fact that man differs p1hysically from other animals might be explainable from the fact that no two kinds of animals are alike. Man possesses some attributes because he is man and not because he is in the image of God. The problem one has in explaining “image of God” is in separating those attributes which man has which distinguish him from other animals from those which constitute the “image of God.” Personally, I would be more inclined to limit the “image of God” to the soul and moral consciousness of man.

Precisely because man is created in the image of God does he have dominion over the habitable earth. Utterly amazed at man’s exalted position in the creation of God, the psalmist said,

“When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers,

The moon and the stars, which Thou hast ordained;

What is man, that Thou dost take thought of him?

And the son of man, that Thou dost care for him?

Yet Thou hast made him a little lower than God,

And dost crown him with glory and majesty!

Thou dost make him to rule over the works of Thy hands;

Thou host put all things under his feet,

All sheep and oxen,

And also the beasts of the field,

The birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea,

Whatever passes through the paths of the seas.” (Ps. 8:3-8).

Even after the fall, man still bears the image of God, and is precious in the sight of God. God so loved man who was created in His image that He sent His only begotten Son to die on Calvary for us. One soul is more precious, according to Jesus, than the whole world (Mt. 16:26).

Evil or Good?

But, is man inherently evil or inherently good? This is not an easy question to answer. God created man as he is. Man is a creature subject to temptation. James said, “But each one of us is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lusts. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death” (1:14, 15). Man is composed of body and spirit; the two are at war with each other. I think William Barclay was right when he said,

“The essence of the flesh is this. No army can invade a country from the sea unless it can obtain a bridgehead. Temptation would be powerless to affect men, unless there was some thing already In man to respond to temptation. Sin could gain no foothold in a man’s mind and heart and soul and life unless there was an enemy within the gates who was willing to open the door to sin. The flesh Is exactly the bridgehead through which sin invades the human personality. The flesh is like the enemy within the gates who opens the way to the enemy, who is pressing In through the gates” (Flesh and Spirit, pp. 21-22).

Thus, man is a creature who is tempted by Satan; Satan attacks us through our flesh (i.e. the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the boastful pride of life).

Possessing free will, man sometimes chooses to do good and sometimes chooses to do evil. The Calvinistic doctrine which states that “no part (of man-MW) is immune from sin and all that proceeds from him is imputed to sin” is wrong. A person only needs to look at the unconverted Cornelius to see that (Acts 10:1-2). The optimism of theological liberalism forgets that man can, and frequently does, chose to sin. When he violates God’s will in choosing to do evil, he becomes a sinner condemned before God. Like Adam, every man is responsible for his choice to sin; he is not responsible for the sins of others; not even those of Adam (Ezek. 18:20). Here is a description of the man who has sinned:

“And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience” (Eph. 2:1-2).

“Therefore remember, that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called `Uncircumcision’ by the so-called `Circumcision,’ which is performed in the flesh by human hands-remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:11-12).

“This I say therefore, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hard. ness of their heart; and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality, for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness” (Eph. 4:17-19).

Since all have sinned (Rom. 3:23), all men are sinners condemned to hell.

Redemption of Man

Yet, God has not utterly given man over to Satan. We, by our choices to do evil, deserve hell and its punishments. But God loved us enough to send Jesus to save us (Jn. 3:16). God’s grace has appeared, bringing salvation to all men -(Tit. 2:14). Yet man must choose to accept that gift of God’s grace. When he does obey God, thus accepting the gift of God’s grace, he is redeemed. “But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ” (Eph. 2:13).

What Is Man?

Man is a creation of God who is made in the image of God. Possessing a fleshly body, he is subject to temptation; possessing free will, he frequently succumbs to temptation. When he sins, he is responsible for it and stands condemned before God as a consequence. Nevertheless, through the blood of Christ, God has provided a means of redemption for fallen men. No, man is not the product of evolution. He is the creation of God. But because he has marred the original creation, man needs to become a new creature in Christ (Eph. 4:20-24).

Truth Magazine XIX: 18, pp. 284-285
March 13, 1975

By Donald P Ames

Perhaps the saddest words ever sung are, “Sad, sad, that bitter wail-`Almost-but lost!” To think that one can be interested, perhaps even striving as hard as he is able, to get so close, and then to lose out completely. The Bible is full of such characters, those who almost gained the prize.

Rich Young Man

Mark 10:17-22 records the story of a young man who “ran” up to Christ-so eager and interested in salvation he could not wait. When Jesus questioned him, Mark says, “He felt a love for him” (Mark 10:21). Here he was so close to the salvation he had sought, a man Jesus could even love for his zeal and love of what was right. Jesus pointed out, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess, and give it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” But, the Bible says, “At these words his face fell, and he went away grieved, for he was one who owned much property.” So close! He had worked for so long-now it was right on the tips of his fingers, and he let it slip right through his hands.

Lot’s Wife

The angels came down into the wicked city of Sodom to rescue Lot and his family from the impending doom God was about to rain upon the city. They even had to take them by the hand and bring them out of the city as they hesitated (Gen. 19:16). Once safely out of the city, they were instructed to hurry and flee for their lives, and not to look back-which they did. They were nearly assured of safety-almost free of the impending doom, “But his wife, from behind him, looked back; and she became a pillar of salt” (Gen. 19:26). Almost safe, only to perish with the rest because she did not obey completely.

Moses

Moses led the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt and tolerated much abuse at their hand, as he sought to lead them to the promised land. He got all the way up to the edge of the land he had worked so hard to lead the people into, but was never permitted to actually enter the land himself. Moses relates how he pleaded with the Lord, ” `Let me, I pray, cross over and see the fair land that is beyond the Jordan, that good hill country and Lebanon.’ But, the Lord was angry with me on your account, and would not listen to me; and the Lord said to me, `Enough! Speak to Me no more of this matter.’ ” (Deut. 3:25-26). So close-he even got to go up into the mountain to see the land itself (Deut. 34:4), but he was not permitted to enter because he had failed to do what God had instructed him (Num. 20:7-12).

Herod Agrippa II

In reasoning before Agrippa, Paul appealed to the prophets and sought to reach the king. He drove his argument home-“King Agrippa, do you believe the Prophets? I know that you do.” Agrippa, feeling the effects of Paul’s logic, replied, “In a short time (almost-KJV), you will persuade me to become a Christian” (Acts 26:27-28). These words of Agrippa truly represent the condition of many living today-they are almost persuaded to obey the gospel and become children of God. They are so close to having the prize right there in their hands-and that is as far as they ever seem to go.

Conclusion

Almost has never been enough to please God. He told those of the Old Testament, “You shall thus observe all My statues, and all My ordinances, and do them: I am the Lord” (Lev. 19:37). And James says, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all” (Jas. 2:10). Do not let “almost” stand between you and salvation! :` ` Almost’ cannot avail; `Almost’ is but to fail! Sad, sad, that bitter wail-`Almost-but lost!’ ” Is that your condition?

Truth Magazine XIX: 18, p. 283
March 13, 1975