Transcript of Weldon E. Warnock’s Radio Program (2-22-04)

“Searching the Scriptures” (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley, WV).
Sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV. 

“Some Problems in the Church of Christ
Concerning Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage” 

…That’s the Beech Creek Church of Christ in Mingo County. 

I want to talk to ya for a little while tonight on some problems in the church of Christ concerning marriage, divorce and remarriage. 

I want to give you a background. Some of ya may have tuned in for the first time, you don’t know what in the world’s going on. But there’s a preacher in the Church of Christ, in Southern WV, that takes this broadcast, and he puts clips of it on his website, as well as some statements concerning the program, and I wouldn’t even know that it was on his website, unless some other brethren mailed it to me. I don’t have a computer where I can get at his website, I have computer, but I’m not set up for that. 

And so, about three weeks ago, this preacher put up on his website “19 Year Progression of Error, Weldon Warnock.” I didn’t even know it was there. He accuses me of being a false teacher and one that’s interfering in the church over at Beckley. Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, I want, tonight, to deny, without any reservations, that I’m a false teacher. Maybe in his perception, that I am, but he’s talking about 19 years being a false teacher, progression of error. But he didn’t give me enough credit. I’ve been preaching for about 50 years, and I believed 50 years ago what I believed 19 years ago, and I believe tonight, concerning marriage, divorce and remarriage: That the innocent party may put away, dismiss, repudiate the guilty party. And when I say innocent party, I’m talking about a faithful, scriptural spouse, may dismiss, disavow, put away the one who’s guilty of fornication and remarry. That’s what Matthew chapter 19, verse 9 plainly teaches, and that’s what we’ve taught through the years. 

Now, I know there’ve been some differences in this area along. My good friend, H.E. Phillips, who passed away a few years ago, he and I differed on this. We talked about it different times when he was in a meeting with me at Knollwood Church in Dayton, OH. We discussed it, but it didn’t affect our relationship. When I was in Beckley, we had him there for a gospel meeting, stayed with us, and I was down in Tampa in a gospel meeting with him. And you know, that’s the way, friend, it ought to be. But you’ve got some who want to make it a test of fellowship. They’ve drawn the line. And, they cancel meetings. If you don’t line up with them, they’ll cancel your meetings. 

Now, we’ve got a preacher coming this spring where I preach here in Scottsville, KY, that we differ on this issue, but he’s coming for a meeting. And I haven’t led the charge to have his meeting cancelled. I don’t play that game, Ladies and Gentlemen, not one bit. And yet, this preacher in Southern WV, led the brethren to cancel a preacher’s meeting in Tampa. He was from Tampa, FL, that, you can’t come to hold a meeting. Why? Because you won’t answer our question, which he answered it. He didn’t answer it according to this preacher in Southern WV’s satisfaction. But he answered that the innocent party may put away the guilty party and marry again. Now, that’s his position, and that’s my position, and I’m willing to defend that. 

Now, this brother, this preacher in Southern WV, he said he would debate me on his website. There have been preachers who have e-mailed him about having a public debate, an oral debate, over in Beckley, and they said they would rather hear a public debate, that they thought it’d do a lot of good, and his response has been, I don’t know if he ever sent an e-mail back to them, but his response has been that more people can hear it, read it on a website. Well, let’s see. Why couldn’t we have a public oral, debate to start with, and then the debate could be put on every website that wanted to have it? It could be put on there as they did over here at Hopkinsville, KY, took the tapes, put the voice on their website, and you can turn on your computer and hear the debate anytime you want, exactly as it was presented. And that’s the way I’d like to have it, my friends. 

I want to tell you, I believe strongly what I preach, and nobody’s going to get by with calling me a false teacher. Here, he talks about me in my article in Searching the Scriptures, back in 1985, a little excerpt he pulled out of that, and put on his website, didn’t put the article, just a little excerpt. And then, he put a good bit of a brother’s article that he wrote in reply, response to my article, we had an exchange in March of 1986. And he ran most of this brother’s article, and none of mine, until I sent all of the articles, I said “if you’re going to run a little bit, you put ‘em all on there,” and that’s what he calls 19 year progression of error, something I wrote in 19 and 85, a little excerpt out of an article, that I’ve been preaching error for 19 years. 

Well, it’s strange that brethren haven’t found that out yet. You know, I’ve been holding meetings, many of ‘em. Last year, got meetings this year, lectureship. And I’m writing, staff writer for Truth Magazine, I write some for Biblical Insights, I was on the Florida College Lectureship two years ago - spoke to about 2,000 people one night, I’m on a lectureship in Florence, AL, coming up here in June, I made four speeches along with three other preachers, I’m on a couple more lectureships, one speech at each lectureship, and then I’m on the lectureship they’re going to have at Bowling Green in July, Truth Magazine is having a lectureship. And I’m to speak on a Tuesday night on that. Now this is this fellow that’s supposed to be promoter of error. Why haven’t these other brethren found it out yet? 

My friend, I want to tell ya, I was in Beckley for 10 years, and wonderful people there. Enjoyed the city, the community, and this was never mentioned. But here comes a fellow along, and he starts his website and he challenges preachers like Ron Halbrook, he’s been after him for over a year, time after time after time, he’s been after him. 

But I want to tell you, I accept the challenge, you get it ready and we’ll have it in Beckley, WV, an oral, public debate. That’s what we’re going to have first. And then you can take the tapes, and other websites and put ‘em on there and everybody can hear across this country. And we can get down to the bottom of all this, Ladies and Gentlemen. Now, let’s see if a fellow has enough courage to step up to the lick log, and just defend what he preaches. You’re not going to call me a false teacher, you’re going to get in a debate, if you’ll have it and don’t run from it, now. You’re not going to hide behind that computer, except you’ll be putting out statements that I won’t even know about, and just found out because of the goodness of some brethren, who sent it to me. 

And I want to tell you, these computers, it’d be a good thing if somebody walked in over there, and stole the thing. The brotherhood would be a way ahead, they’d cut down on all of this argumentation about this one issue preacher, obsessed with it, day and night, all that’s on there is about marriage, divorce and remarriage. And it takes time, hour after hour after hour after hour, on this one issue. What about other subjects? And, (laughs) here’s the problem, Ladies and Gentlemen, that we have. 

Now, this preacher, he says, he uses this terminology, about post-divorce fornication. Fornication committed by one after the civil divorce. What about pre-divorce fornication? Now, they’re divided on this issue, let’s look at pre-divorce fornication for a moment. Here is a man, let’s say for example, that commits fornication against his wife.  But she wants to salvage the marriage, maybe children involved, she’s working at it to try to reconcile, and he gets a divorce and lo and behold, she becomes the put away.  This preacher in Southern WV, as I understand his position, says she cannot remarry, because she’s been the put away. 

Now that’s it, friends. I told this story some time ago, about a soldier during the Vietnam war, over in TX. He was gone 12, 13 months to Vietnam, he left for Vietnam, a wife behind, and when he returned a year or a little longer, she had divorced him and married somebody else. Now, the question: Could he remarry? He did about two or three years later, brethren thought nothing of it, could he remarry? Not according to the preacher in Southern WV. No, no, no, no. It was post-divorce fornication. Maybe, but what if it were pre-divorce fornication, and she put him away, he had nothing to do with it, he didn’t even know it, ‘til he got back home. Now that’s why, Ladies and Gentlemen, this is so radical and extreme. 

Friends I have that would disagree with me on this don’t act that way. My, my, my, what have we come to? And he causes dissention in the church, and unrest in the church, and confusion in the church. And you know, brethren, there’s something to think about. When members of the church give on Sunday of their money, and you pay somebody of this kind, you’re having fellowship with him. Philippians chapter 1, verse 5, Paul said to the church at Philippi, that you had fellowship with me, thanked them that they had fellowship with him from the first until now, first day until now, and that had to do with money. They sent money to Paul and he called it a fellowship. When we support somebody that is causing havoc in the church, dissention in the church, then we’re having fellowship with him, by supporting him, Ladies and Gentlemen. And so it’s a serious matter indeed.

I’ve got good friends who we differ on this. I don’t know any preachers that would agree on everything, 100%. Do you? You know, I wonder what the next issue is going to be, the war question? You know, the Bible says, thou shalt not kill, and so if you go to war or if you’re a policeman, and you have to shoot somebody that’s murder. That is not, they’re simply doing what God set up the government to do. And to accuse a policeman of being a murderer is nonsense. Or a soldier that defends his country as being a murderer is absurd. Well, there’ve been brethren differed on this, but each one had his own conscience and scruples and we went on didn’t make it an issue, but it may be next down the road. Some younger fellow may come along and he’ll decide: oh, listen, we’ve got to get all the brethren straightened out on this. 

Oh, he said, I’ve been preaching this for, this error for 19 years. Let me tell you something, I was preaching before you were born. And that’s for sure, and I’ve been at it a long time, and my reputation is intact across this country. And if we want to start lining up preachers, lining up churches, well, we could go at it, friends. And I know what I believe, and I know the reputation I’ve established over the years among churches of Christ all across this country. And so I resent somebody lambasting me privately on his website, that I know nothing about. 

But I’m doing mine out in the open, and he’s listening because he’s taping it. And so I’m not hiding behind anything, neighbor. I want to have a public discussion, it’ll be done in a Christian spirit, it’ll be done in a right way, with dignity and honor. 

And here’s the New Testament church, they had controversy, had debate, Jesus was a debater, a controversialist, Matthew 22, there’s a series of ‘em there, in that chapter, and he won every one of ‘em. And here were some Judaizers, came down from Jerusalem to Antioch, and taught that in order to be saved you have to keep the law of Moses and be circumcised. There was much debating in the church at Antioch. Read Acts 15. When they came to Jerusalem, Paul and Barnabas and other brethren, that they sent from Antioch, they had another debate. They debated it. And there’s nothing wrong with debating it. 

But some people you know, (laughs) don’t want that. Un-uh. And I think that might be the way this preacher thing, no, I don’t want to do that, no I want to sit behind that computer. No, let’s just get it out in the open and we’ll have a discussion and we’ll just see which side the bread is buttered on, so to speak, in all of this. 

Now, this preacher to whom I’ve referring, of whom I’m referring tonight, sent e-mail up to Paden City church of Christ in Northern WV, Northern panhandle. Some preacher had come there and quoted one statement from this brother in Southern WV. He sends an e-mail up to the elders. I’d like to have all of my material distributed among all the members. And yet, he (laughs) has opposition, he’s critical of a brother in Tampa, Tom O’Neal, who sends his response to this preacher up to Beckley, WV, and he says he’s interfering and yet, he wants his material distributed in Paden City, WV and I’d like to see a debate up there. Well, he was told to have a debate down there (laughs) in your own back door, in that case. 

But you see what’s going on, see friends, we don’t know what all’s going on here. And I don’t know whether I know what all’s going on, but I know enough that’s going on that it doesn’t sound very good, I’ll tell you that. 

He said, well, the preacher in Tampa, he’s interfering, sending out unsolicited mail. And yet he sits behind that computer and sends that e-mail out all over the country about everything. Unsolicited with many, they don’t ask for it, but they get it anyway. It’s alright to send it out on the e-mail, yeah, he can do that alright, there’s nothing wrong with that. But don’t send it through the US Mail, the Post Office. That’s not proper, that’s not good, that’s being uncouth, that’s being unethical. Well that (laughs) that is ludicrous, Ladies and Gentlemen. And they’re probably glad to see the other side ‘cause it’s all going to be hidden from them, as to what he was asking. And he was asking this fellow about marriage, divorce and remarriage and said, well, said we ask them all that come our way. Well, that isn’t true. What about the ones are coming, next, going to be coming over there in the future? You ask them? According to a couple of ‘em, you didn’t ask ‘em anything. But they’re coming anyway. It’s only picking on the brother in Tampa, FL, it seems to me, and let the rest of ‘em come on anyhow. 

Now, we hear this about this putting away, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Lord Jesus Christ allows fornication as a right to put away and remarry. The innocent spouse, they put away the guilty one. Well, somebody says, well now, it might be a second putting away, preacher, if the woman doesn’t contest it and she is put away, she can’t do it later, it’d be a second putting away.  No, no, no, it’s just one, one for her. 

You mean the Lord allows the guilty one to take advantage of the innocent one? The innocent one can repudiate, disavow the marriage. And I raise this question for you to consider: in the first century, the Jewish women were always put away. The Bible teaches that, in Deuteronomy chapter 24, verse 1 beginning, now read it for yourself. And when Jesus was talking to the Pharisees in Matthew the 19^th chapter, they raised this question: what about Moses? He gave a command to the bill of divorcement, to put who? - her away. Jesus said, by the hardness of your heart, Moses suffered you to put away your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. Now, who did the putting away? The men, they put away their wives, and so the Bible says. 

Now, you know, it’s a shame that this preacher in Southern WV and a few that are just like him, weren’t back there to instruct Moses about that. That you need to put in there the women can, too. And then, look at the authorities, Ladies and Gentlemen, along this line. That the men could put away, the Jewish culture of the first century and years thereafter, but the women couldn’t put away. Here’s Josephus in pages 380 and 381, who states, the women didn’t put away, divorce. And here is James Hastings, dictionary of the Bible, 148 scholars put that book together, I have it in several volumes, I also have it in one volume, and in the dictionary of the Bible, it says that the men put away the women, and I’m paraphrasing that, of course, but indeed, it could not be done by the women. RCH Lenski, Dr. Lenski at Capitol University several years ago wrote a series of commentaries on the New Testament, said that the men put away the women, the women not the men. Dr. William Barclay, professor at the University of Glasgow in Scotland, and we read his books, William Barclay, a great scholar, Barclay said, in Matthew 19, in his commentary, that the men put away and not the women. Dr. William Hendrickson who got his doctorate of theology, I think it was theology rather than divinity, doctor of theology at Princeton Theological Seminary, you read the footnote in Hendrickson’s commentary on Matthew chapter 5, he said that the husband could reject the wife, but not vice versa. 

And so, it goes on (laughs) and on, why the evidence is on my side. And here’s these women that were put away, and this preacher says any put away person can’t remarry. Well, how in the world did they remarry? Would you please tell me how they remarried since they were always put away, friends? 

And what about this man over in Texas who’d gone to Vietnam and he came back, and his wife had divorced him. What would you tell him to do, my friend? What would you tell him to do? Ya-oh, you can’t marry. I tell you about some of these preachers, if we got in a fix like that, they’d be remarried in six months. There’s a few of ‘em like that, anyway. Now, that’s not true with all of ‘em. But there’s some of ‘em, they’d see their position a little bit differently. Now, what did Jesus say, Matthew 19 verse 9?  Whosoever shall put away his wife, now notice who did the putting away there. Whosoever shall put away his wife except for fornication and marries another committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her that is put away doth commit adultery - unless fornication is involved. 

But, what about the Jewish women of the first century, and what about the Muslim women? Now I introduced the Muslim women, and you know, if you couldn’t go with me, I’ve been to Israel 16 times and Jordan. I’ve traveled around and seen the Bedouins and you know the man, the husband comes to the tent with the tribal chief, he takes hold of the tent rope and he says to his wife, I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you, he says that three times and walked away. She’s divorced. She couldn’t remarry, according to this theory that’s being propagated today. Oh yeah, Ladies and Gentlemen, marriage is permanent, with husband and wife, one man, one woman, but fornication will break it if a woman is innocent women or innocent husband puts away the guilty one, just like death does in Romans chapter 7. 

But time is about to get away from me, here. I wanted to say I appreciate you listening tonight and sorry I had to present this stuff, but this is my only outlet, when a fellow takes his website and plasters it all over the country, then I’ve got to say something about it. And so we’ll have the debate. Let’s have the debate – an oral debate, and then you can put the tape, you can put the audio on the website, and so you can’t say (laughs) about just a limited number of people of hearing it. Everybody can hear it who wants to hear it, and let’s just see how serious we really are. This is a problem, friends, that’s been made a problem by some in the church of our Lord Jesus Christ. If you’d like to call me, you can call me at (270) 237-9514 or write the Beech Creek church of Christ. Thank you so much for listening and have a very pleasant good evening and may the Lord richly bless you.

Home | Search This Site