11

Marriage, God’s DesignMarriage, God’s DesignRomans 7:1-4; Matt 19:3-12Romans 7:1-4; Matt 19:3-12

God

Laws of the Land

God binds man to woman as they comply with laws of the land at marriage legitimizing the sexual union.

woman 1man 1

Law of Husband

Rom.7

Law of wife

Rom.7

Wife is bound to the husband by the law of the husband Rom. 7:1-4

Husband is bound to the wife by the law of the Wife Rom. 7:1-4

22

Remarriage, God Approves Remarriage, God Approves Romans 7:1-4; Matt 19:3-12Romans 7:1-4; Matt 19:3-12

• Death – Release Bond

God

Laws of the Land

God releases man and woman from the law of the husband and the law of the wife by the death of wife, thus allowing man to marry again.

woman 1man 1

Law of HusbandRom.7

Law of wife

Rom.7

Wife loosedfrom law of husband Rom. 7:1-4

Husband loosed from law of Wife by death Rom. 7:1-4

Wife Dies

X

God

Laws of the Land

God binds man to woman as they comply with laws of the land at marriage legitimizing the sexual union.

woman 2man 1

Law of Husband 2

Rom.7

Law of wife 2Rom.7

Wife bound by law of husband Rom. 7:1-4

Husband bound by the law of Wife Rom. 7:1-4

• Remarriage – Approved

Wife Dies

XWife Dies

X

33

Remarriage, Not AdulteratedRemarriage, Not AdulteratedRomans 7:1-4; Matt 19:3-12Romans 7:1-4; Matt 19:3-12

• Death - Releases Bond

God

Laws of the Land

God binds man to woman as they comply with laws of the land at marriage legitimizing the sexual union.

woman 1man 1

Law of HusbandRom.7

Law of wife

Rom.7

Wife bound by the law of husband Rom. 7:1-4

Husband loosed from law of Wife by death Rom. 7:1-4

• No Adultery • Though joined to another• Hebrews 7:3

God

Laws of the Landwoman 2man 1

Law of Wife 2Rom.7

Wife Dies

X

Law of Husband

Rom.7

Wife Dies

XWife Dies

X

44

Marriage Adulterated by ManMarriage Adulterated by Man

• Marriage• Husband divorces Wife• Unscriptural – Divorce

God bound man to woman as they comply with laws of the land at marriage legitimizing the relationship. But divorce does not loose the law of the husband or the law of the wife thus adulterating the marriage.

God

Laws of the Landwoman 1man 1

Law of Husband 1

Rom.7

Law of Wife 1Rom.7

Divorce

X

Wife still bound by law of husband Rom. 7:1-4; Matt. 19:9

Husband still bound by law of wife Rom. 7:1-4; Matt. 19:9

55

Marriage Adulterated by ManMarriage Adulterated by Man

• Adultery• Husband – another wife• Unscriptural remarriage

Man is joined to two women at the same time.One joined by God, the other joined by the laws of the land adulterating the relationship.

God

woman 1man 1

Law of Wife 1Rom.7

woman 2

Laws of the Land

Husband 1 still bound by law of the wife. Divorce for other than fornication doesnot release him. Matt. 19:9; Rom 7:1-4

Wife 1 still bound by law of the husband.Divorce for other than fornication does notrelease her. Rom. 7:1-4; Matt. 19:9

Law of Husband 1

Rom.7

Laws of the Land

Divorce

X The man is married or joined to two women at the same time.

66

Divorce And Remarriage, The ProblemDivorce And Remarriage, The ProblemAuthorized Remarriage

God releases the man from law to the wife and he is free to marry another. This is the Biblical pattern authorized by God in Matthew 19:3-12 and Romans 7:1-4. The exception clause of Matthew 19:9 is shown by excepting him from law to the wife to which she is still bound.

Unauthorized Remarriage God binds man, by law to the wife, to woman 1(Rom 7:1-4). Their subsequent divorce for reasons other than adultery does not release the bond of either the husband or the wife (Matt.19:9). When the husband remarries woman 2, they commit adultery ( Matt. 19:9) Man is still bound by God to woman 1 while he marries woman 2, being bound to two women at the same time, thereby committing adultery.

God

woman 1

man 1

Law of Wife 1Rom.7

woman 2

Laws of the Land

Husband1 still bound by law of the wife. Divorce for other than fornication doesnot release him. Matt. 19:9; Rom 7:1-4

Wife 1 still bound by law of the husband.Divorce for other than fornication does notrelease her. Rom. 7:1-4; Matt. 19:9

Law of Husband 1

Rom.7

Laws of the Land

Husband 1 is bound to two women at the same time; one by law of land the other by God’s law. Rom. 7:1-4; Matt. 19:9

Divorce

X

77

If This Is Such A Simple Issue Why Are If This Is Such A Simple Issue Why Are So Many Smart People Divided Over it??So Many Smart People Divided Over it??

• Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage??– Alexander Campbell– Barton W. Stone– Walter Scott– Homer Haley– Yater Tant– David Lipscomb– Homer Haley– F.B.Srygley– R.L. Whiteside– N.B. Hardeman– H. Leo Boles– C.R. Nichol– G.C. Brewer– W.W. Otey– John L. Lewis– Foy E. Wallace– Franklin Puckett– J.W. McGarvey– James Adams– How could these smart men not understand this

subject like we do today? How could they be geniuses in every area and old coots on Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage. The subject must not be as easy as we have been told it is, therefore let’s not divide over this issue.

• We should fellowship everyone no matter what their marriage.

• With this thinking, it shows that man is our standard of authority and not God and His word.

• Plan Of Salvation??– Joseph Henry Thayer– A.T. Robertson– Albert Barnes– James MacKnight– E.J. Young– R.C.H. Lenski– R.C. Trench– E.W. Bullinger– James Strong– John McClintock– Martin Luther– Zwingly– Calvin– All The Reformation Leaders & worlds greatest

scholars– 99% Of Commentators– How could these smart men not understand the

simple plan of salvation? How could they be geniuses in every area and old coots on the plan of salvation. The subject must be too difficult and therefore we can’t understand it and should not divide over this issue either.

• So let’s join in fellowship with all denominations.• With this thinking, it shows that man is our

standard of authority and not God and His word.

88

Adultery (MOICHAO) 4298 - VerbAdultery (MOICHAO) 4298 - Verb•W.E. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words

– Defines the noun form as “denotes one ‘who has unlawful intercourse with the spouse of another’”...The verb form “is used in the middle voice in the NT, is said of men in Matt. 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11; of women in Mark 10:12”

•Word Pictures in the New Testament, A.T. Robertson page 154-155– “Except for fornication (PAREDTOS LOGOU PORNEIAS). This is the marginal reading in Westcott

and Hort which also adds ‘maketh her an adulteress’ (POIIEI AUTEN MOICHEUTHENAI) and also these words: ‘and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery’ (KAI HO APOLELUMENEN GAMESAS MOICHATAI)... McNeile holds that ‘the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up.’ That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew’s report because it disagrees with one’s views on the subject of divorce. He adds: ‘it cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai.’ Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew’s report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in 5:31, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one.”

•A Greek - English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by William Arndt and Wilber Gingrich pg. 526

– “1. of a woman (Ezek 16:32) the man who divorces his wife causes her to commit adultery (if she contracts a new marriage) Mt 5:32; Mk 10:12

– 2. of a man, who marries a divorced woman Mt. 5:32; 19:9 or who marries again after divorcing his wife 19:9 commits adultery against her (his first wife) Mk 10:11.

– 3. of a man or woman, whoever acts as the heathen do (i.e.., takes part in idol-worship), commits adultery (and it cannot be expected of the other marriage-partner to maintain marital relations).

•Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon, page 417– “To have unlawful intercourse with another’s wife, to commit adultery with”

99

Adultery As Taught At ______ ___Adultery As Taught At ______ ___

• Covenant Breaking - Breaking the marriage covenant– The Divorce and Remarriage = Adultery (a one time act)

– The sexual act is not what Jesus was referring to in Matthew 19:9 (continuous act)

• Present Tense Verb - Must be Punctiliar

– One point in time - Adultery is a one time act and not a continuing relationship.

– Olan Hicks in What The Bible Says About Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage page 31 quoting Dana and Mantey A Manual of the Greek New Testament.

– “It is a mistake to suppose that the durative meaning monopolizes the present stem”

1010

How Adultery Is Used In How Adultery Is Used In ScriptureScripture

• Matt. 5:28 “Who looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery in his heart” - Sexual sin or not ?

• Matt 5:32 “Who divorces his wife, except for the cause of fornication makes her commit adultery” - Sexual sin or not ?

• Matt 19:9 “Whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery” - Sexual sin or not?

• Mk 10:11-12 “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” - Sexual sin or not?

• John 8:3 “Woman caught in adultery, in the very act” - Sexual sin or not?• Romans 2:22 “You who say do not commit adultery do you commit adultery?” - Sexual sin or not?

Look at context• Romans 13:9 “ For the commandments, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder…” -

Sexual sin or not• Galatians 5:19 “The works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness,

lewdness…” - Sexual sin or not• Heb 13:4 “Let the marriage bed be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled,

for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.” - Sexual sin or not• 2Pet 2:14 “having eyes full of adultery and that cannot cease from sin, enticing unstable souls…” -

Sexual sin or not• Look at every passage of scripture and see if covenant breaking or a sexual sin is what is under

discussion!!

1111

Adultery AS Viewed By God In ScripturesAdultery AS Viewed By God In Scriptures

• Malachi 2:16 “For the Lord God of Israel says that He hates divorce”– They perverted the law vs.8

– They had dealt treacherously with the wife of their youth vs.14

– They did not even have a remnant of the Spirit of God vs.15

– But God allowed it under the law and regulated it Duet 24.

• Did God hate divorce under the Law? Yes• Did God allow divorce under the law? Yes• Does God hate divorce still? Yes• Does God allow divorce today? Yes but only for fornication• Any teaching that allows free divorce and remarriage undermines

God’s teaching on divorce.

1212

Dana and Mantey the whole Dana and Mantey the whole quotequote

• Page 176 – No element of the Greek language is of more importance to the student of the New

Testament than the matter of tense. A variation in meaning exhibited by the use of a particular tense will often dissolve what appears to be an embarrassing difficulty, or reveal a gleam of truth which will thrill the heart with delight and inspiration

• Page 178– There are, therefore three fundamental tenses in Greek: the present, representing

continuous action; the perfect, representing completed action; and the aorist (...without limits, undefined in time), representing indefinite action

• Page 181– It is a mistake to suppose that the durative meaning monopolizes the present stem...

(now picking up where Olan Hicks left off). Since there is no aorist tense for present time, the present tense, as used in the indicative, must do service for both linear and punctiliar action. But it is to be borne in mind that the idea of present time is secondary in the force of the tense. The time element belongs to the indicative, where the present tense is really the ‘imperfect of present time,’ while what we know as the imperfect tense is the ‘imperfect of past time.’ The progressive force of the present tense should always be considered as primary, especially with reference to the potential moods, when the nature of the case does not need any ‘present punctiliar’ tense.

1313

Punctiliar action vs. Punctiliar action vs. Continuous or Durative actionContinuous or Durative action

• Punctiliar Action

• Continuous or Durative Action

Past Actioncontinuing into

Present Actioncontinuing into

Future Action

Present time

1414

Matthew 5: 31-32Matthew 5: 31-32“Furthermore it has been said, ‘whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.”• The question was asked how does he make her commit adultery?

– The divorce defrauds the wife of the husband’s affection due the wife I Cor.7:2-3– Marriage legitimizes the sexual relationship I Cor. 7:4-5– He causes her to do what she does herself

• This answer is by allowing or providing opportunity for her sin• The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart

– Exodus 7:3 “And I will harden Pharaoh's heart– 8:32 “But Pharaoh hardened his heart “– God simply provided the opportunity for Pharaoh to harden his own heart

• The affliction of Job– Job 1:12 “And the Lord said to Satan, Behold, all that he has is in your

power...” – Job 2:3 “..And still he holds fast to his integrity, although you incited Me

against him, to destroy him without cause” – God simply allowed Satan the opportunity to afflict Job

• The man makes her commit adultery - Matthew 5:32– He does so by providing the opportunity for the adultery– By withholding the affection due his wife

1515

Does God Demand Keeping A Does God Demand Keeping A Covenant Without Exception?Covenant Without Exception?

• Genesis 27 is given as proof text– By deceit Jacob stole Esau’s blessing– Esau asked for the blessing and Isaac refused– Because he had already blessed Jacob– Therefore it is reasoned once a covenant is made it can not be broken

• Consider Ezra 10 in connection with a covenant given– God had warned Israel not to take foreign wives because of Idolatrous background– Israel took wives of foreign women anyway vs. 2

• They made a marriage covenant with the women of the land• Was this covenant to be kept ?

– Ezra was instructed to have all the men to make a covenant with God vs.3• Their later covenant with God superceded the prior marriage covenant• God demanded that they break the covenant with the foreign wives

– They were to put away their foreign wives and children born of them vs.3-4• Faithfulness to God demanded the putting away of their former marriage covenant• Refusal to break this covenant meant separation from God’s chosen people

– Those who refuses would be cut off from the people of Israel vs.8

• Sometimes Faithfulness demands putting away an unrighteous covenant

– Faithfulness may sometimes require putting away an unscriptural

1616

The Bounds Of fellowshipThe Bounds Of fellowship• We Cannot Avoid Some Worldly Associations

– 1 Corinthians 5: 9-10

• We Cannot, However, Have Fellowship With Sin

– 1 John 1:1-7; 2 John 9-11

• We Can Be At Different Levels Of Spiritual Growth and Have Fellowship

– 1 John 2:12-14

• But Fellowship Is Confined Only To Those That Walk In The Light

– 1 John 1:7; 2 John 9-11

• We Must Stand Against Sinful Practices and Reprove Them– Ephesians 5:1-16

• We Must Separate Form Those That Practice Sin

– 2 Corinthians 6:17-18; 2 Thessalonians 3:6; 1 Corinthians 5:9-11

• Else we are partakers with them

– Ephesians 5:7

1717

Historical Consequences Of Fellowship With Historical Consequences Of Fellowship With ErrorError

• The Stone-Campbell Movement Leroy Garrett– pg.309 “Another fact that runs counter to subsequent practice is that the most adamant

opponents of the organ, J.W. McGarvey and Benjamin Franklin, insisted that it should not be made a test of fellowship. In fact, from 1849 until the 1880’s there was only one prominent leader in the Movement that called fro non-fellowship over the instrument, and that was Moses E. Lard.

– There is reason to conclude, therefore, that they could have absorbed this controversy without an open spl;it, just as they did the question of open communion. for decades the Movement had both instrument and non-instrument churches without schism, a difference but not division. This could have continued but for other factors.”

– pg. 315 “This was characteristic of McGarvey’s ambivalence on the instrument question. After being adamantly opposed to the instrument in the earlier years of the controversy, he said little about it in the after years, leading some to suppose that he no longer objected to it, which was not the case. For forty years he kept the organ out of the Broadway church in Lexington where he served as preacher and elder, and yet he sanctioned the use of pianos in its Sunday School.”

– pg.318 “But the story of J.W. McGarvey does not support the view that those who disagreed with him about the instrument had a different attitude toward the Scriptures than he did, though there was obviously a difference in interpreting the Scriptures. For 19 years, off and on, McGarvey ministered to the Bethlehem church out from Lexington, which gave its people;e ample time to understand his argument against the organ. They nonetheless decided to use an instrument.”

• But J.W. McGarvey Learned from his mistake– Plain Talk Vol.4, No.3– www.cedarparkchurchofchrist.org/ptalk/v4/n3a.htm

• When Will we?

1818

Plain TalkPlain Talk• Vol. 4, No. 3• May, 1967 • Where Is Your Influence? • A short time back bro. Ferrel Jenkins visited with an aged disciple, bro. Henry S. Ficklin, who studied at the feet

of J.W. McGarvey years ago.  We let bro. Jenkins tell the story.

"In the 19th century when the church was divided over the use of instrumental music and the missionary society, McGarvey took what might be described as a "middle-of-the-road" position.  He opposed the use of the instrument but favored the society.  Even though he opposed the organ in worship and moved his membership when the Broadway church, Lexington, Ky., adopted the organ by majority vote, he continued to fraternize with those who used it.  What about his students whom he taught that the instrument in worship was wrong?  Did they follow his scriptural advice?  No!  Bro. Ficklin commented that McGarvey's influence went with his fellowship and not with his teaching."

In 1950 bro. J.P. Sewell, in a Harding College lecture, recalled the following advice, given to him by bro. McGarvey away back in 1902.  It is advice preachers today might ponder. 

• "You are on the right road, and whatever you do, don't let anybody persuade you that you can successfully combat error by fellowshipping it and going along with it. I have tried it.  I believed at the start that was the only way to do it. I've never held membership in a congregation that uses instrumental music. I have, however, accepted invitations to preach without distinction between churches that used it and churches that didn't.  I've gone along with their papers and magazines and things of that sort.  During all these years I have taught the truth as the NT teaches it to every young preacher who has passes through the College of the Bible. Yet, I do not know of more than six of those men who are preaching the truth today. It won't work"

• Our influence goes with what we do rather than with what we say.  Ponder this well, you preachers, elders, and members who give your presence, support, and silent acquiescence to practices you know to be without divine authority.  You hope to teach them?  Do you know more about teaching than J.W. McGarvey and the Lord?? (Matt. 12:30)

• [Previous Article] [Next Article]

1919

What If We Are Wrong??What If We Are Wrong??

• If My Position Is Wrong

– People remain celibate for life

– They lose right to marriage in this life

– They do not forfeit Heaven

– They only loose on this life’s blessings

• If The Other Position Is Wrong– People enjoy pleasures of illicit

life

– They can marry without concern

– They loose out on Heaven

– Heb 13:4 “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled; for fornicators and adulterers God will judge.

Is It Worth It To Risk Heaven???