AUDIO QUOTES

AUDIO QUOTES

To download a file to your computer, please right-mouse click the button and select "Save Target As..."

1.	*Ron Halbrook: Sermon entitled "Marriage, Divorce & Remarriage"* in Wilkesville, OH (6-14-90).** See: An excerpt of an MDR sermon by Ron Halbrook given in Wilkesville, OH on this website.	Play Clip!
QUOTE: “And so, in conclusion from this, we learn that an unscriptural divorce releases neither party from marriage. When you have an unscriptural divorce, as men count it, it’s not so with God. That bond is still in tact. And that little piece of paper is nothing in the sight of God. Just as well use it as Kleenex and blow your nose and drop it in the toilet. It doesn’t mean a thing to God. God’s law rules over the laws of men.”
2.	Tim Haile: Sermon entitled "Biblical ‘Putting Away’" in Clarksville, TN (2-12-02). See articles: What Are They Really Saying? an d The Shell Game on this website.	Play Clip!
QUOTE: “Jesus said the innocent party has the power over the marriage bond. Somebody said, “But couldn’t the fornicator just leave and break the marriage?” Oh yeah, anybody can break a marriage. If I go out there and get in my green truck (I’d have to drop Steve off and Steve could catch a ride with maybe somebody else), I get in my truck and I skin out of here today – I didn’t drive the vet today but I hate to let you down ah, and maybe invalidate your illustration – hopefully not, but you know, if I had that vet I could go a little faster. Especially if I’m going to leave my wife anyway and I don’t care about the civil law. So, I can go a little faster and I’m going to just spin out of here in a hurry and I never see my wife again, never talk to her again, I have broken my marriage. I have broken, I have deserted, I have left, I have loosed, I have broken my marriage. Guess what remains intact? The marriage bond. I did absolutely nothing to affect that marriage bond, and guess what? If I go out and commit fornication, I’ve done something that might be used to affect the marriage bond, but I have still by that action, not affected the marriage bond. You know it’s still intact? That’s why Jesus gives the option for the innocent party to put the guilty away or not.”
3.	Tim Haile: Sermon entitled "Biblical ‘Putting Away’" in Clarksville, TN (2-12-02). See articles: What Are They Really Saying? an d The Shell Game on this website.	Play Clip!
QUOTE: "Brethren like to talk about that a lot. Ah. That is something that is being studied. Ah, I’ll tell you what I’m comfortable speaking on, I’m studying that question with some brethren right now. Ah. It’s a difficult one because it gets into motive. Did that fella leave in order to go meet up with his new girlfriend? Did he leave in order to go have an affair with his secretary? Those are a lot of questions. If he left, and the cause of the break up—the cause of the break up was fornication, then I’m a little more lenient on that. But I think it is in the realm of study and we need to be careful and study those things. But I really don’t want to get into any questions, in fact I won’t answer any questions today, about fornication committed after, ah, ah, the break up. I just won’t do that." In brother Haile’s two audio quotes (2 & 3), he clearly approves of a second putting away and remarriage in cases which involve FORNICATION which occurs AFTER (NOT BEFORE) an unscriptural putting away. Speaking of an unlawful repudiation [that which Tim regards as an unscriptural divorce (“apoluo”)] through use of his characteristic terminology, Tim contends that [because of the remaining “marriage bond” after an unscriptural divorce (in which not even “motive” of fornication is implied)] his subsequent fornication could later “affect that marriage bond.” Compare this example (which includes no “motive” of fornication) with his second quotation. After brother Haile’s lesson, he was publicly asked a question about a scenario involving FORNICATION only AFTER (NOT BEFORE) an unscriptural putting away. After realizing the full impact of his first quotation, it is no wonder that he says he is “a little more* lenient”* (emp. jhb) with this scenario question. However, Matthew 19:9 is as silent as the tomb concerning any “motive” prior to the breaking up of the marriage. Furthermore, although Jesus only authorized ONE scriptural (“biblical”) sequence for divorce and remarriage, these brethren (and others) authorize a SECOND DIVORCE and REMARRIAGE when fornication is committed AFTER THE FACT of DIVORCEMENT!!!
4.	*Harry Osborne: Sermon entitled “What Is Biblical ‘Putting Away’?”* in Lakeland, FL. (5-29-01).** See The Nevada Strawman on this web site, which proves that such a scenario could not have taken place as brother Osborne described it. Moreover, it is important to see article: What Are They Really Saying?	Play Clip!
QUOTE: “Man’s law is not equal to God’s law. God’s law has a greater force. And yet, some would suggest by the idea of making the civil proceeding that which is equated to Biblical putting away – here goes a person out here and takes the civil action – person doesn’t know that – I particularly know of a case of this happening in Houston. Man went away to Las Vegas. His wife thought he was leaving on a Monday to go on a business trip to New York; he actually went to Las Vegas with a girl he had been having relations with. He went out there on Monday, filed for divorce, and in Nevada you have a three day waiting period, you can mail the procedure to the spouse. When it was mailed, it didn’t get to her before they got back on Friday. When they get back on Friday, he says, ‘by the way hun, I didn’t go to New York, I went to Las Vegas. I’ve divorced you, I’ve married her.’ The first his wife knew about it was at that time. She told him, ‘I don’t want to have anything to do with you if you’re ungodly and going to stay in that relationship. I’m going to put you away. That farce that you had of an action out there in Las Vegas is not what was putting away.’ If civil procedure is the putting away, that woman was divorced, didn’t know about it, and there is no way she can be protected by the law of God. I suggest to you the principles of God would show the very opposite. The principles would show she does have a right to say ‘here’s why I’m going away from you. I’m expressing that as the reason why. I’m taking action. You get your stuff out of here.’ That’s Biblical putting away - and it’s Biblical putting away for the cause, and it’s Biblical putting away after the very principles that Jesus made clear.” In that sermon, Harry also stated, “Neither is this a defense of a second putting away.” Yet, in spite of the preceding repudiation and civil putting away, he denies that this subsequent “putting away” procedure (by the one who has already been repudiated and then civilly put away) is indeed a second “divorce” procedure. Furthermore, it also becomes unmistakably transparent that Harry depends on our human sense of justice (reasoning) rather than the sacred text to establish “authorization” for this *second* divorce. (Where did Jesus promise us to be “protected” from physical injustices???) His justification for this denial obviously stems from a belief that (at least some) unscriptural divorces are not “biblical,” and are therefore not really divorces. He frequently uses the term “biblical putting away,” as though the Bible speaks nothing of an “unscriptural divorce” (or an “unlawful divorce”), nor of its consequences. Is every unscriptural divorce not “biblical” and therefore, not really a divorce at all? If this is so, anytime a couple unscripturally divorces, then whoever fornicates first is the one who is one who can be “put away” for the cause, and the other “mate” can employ this “putting away” with the hope of lawful remarriage to another. If it is not so (that all unscriptural divorces are unbiblical and therefore not recognized), what criteria do we use to distinguish between those unscriptural puttings away that are “*biblical” and those that are unbiblcal? What is so ironic is the fact that the procedure of civil divorce fulfills even Harry’s own stated definition of APOLUO (involving intent, expression* and action to bring about the sundering of the marriage). Yet, after that action, he would allow for her to later say to the one who civilly divorced her: “*I’m going to put you away. That farce that you had of an action…is not what was putting away*” (emp. jhb). Beloved, if this is not a *second* “apoluo” what is?
5.	*Mike Willis: Sermon entitled "When Is Divorce A Sin?"* in Danville, IN. (Sept. 1996).** See article: Willis on “Biblical Putting Away” on this website.	Play Clip!
EXCERPT FROM OUTLINE (UNDER SUBTOPIC NUMBER TWO HE WROTE): "a. A person may have to divorce his mate to break an unscriptural marriage (Matt. 19:9). In this case, one is divorcing for the kingdom of heaven's sake. b. A person may have to leave his mate to become or remain a Christian (Luke 18:29-30; 1 Cor. 7: 15; Matt. 10:34-48; Luke 14:26). In this case, one is divorcing for the kingdom of heaven's sake. c. A person may be in a marriage relationship in which his mate runs up bills which he has no intention of paying. In this case, one's responsibility to God to pay one's bills would demand that he not be supportive of his mate's ungodly behavior (Rom. 13:8). d. A mate may be abusive to the children (beating). A person has a responsibility to bring up his children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:1-4). To fulfill that responsibility, may require him to leave his mate to provide for the children. e. There are some cases in which one must leave to have physical and emotional health. One's obligation to serve God would require him to preserve his physical and emotional well being. f. Sometimes a couple becomes so alienated from each other, the hostilities have reached such a point, that they must live apart. (1) Cf. Prov. 21:9; 25:24; 1 Cor. 7:15-16. (2) We cannot force them to stay together. (3) The Scriptures do not teach a person that he must become a doormat to his partner to keep the marriage together. A person who becomes another’s doormat will do more to destroy his mate’s love and respect for him than about anything else he can do. A person has to maintain his own self-esteem to have proper Bible love. One is to love his neighbor “as himself” and the husband is to love his wife “as his own body” (Matt. 22:39; Eph. 5:33). g. Obviously, there is going to have to be left some room for judgment in these matters. (Those who allow a "separation" but not a "divorce" agree that there are some areas of human judgment that we must leave for each other.) C. Sometimes we place the blame for divorce on the wrong shoulders -- we blame the mate who has reached the end of his rope in tolerating an intolerable situation and in his desperation has filed for a divorce, rather than blaming the one guilty of the ungodliness who created the intolerable circumstances. D. If one must separate from his mate in order to serve his God, that is exactly what he should do!" Brother Willis has set forth some very loose “case”s to justify divorce under the pretext “in order to serve his God” (see point D above – cf. Deut. 12:8; 13:18; and II Cor. 5:7). If a divorce will help you to serve God, Mike says, do “exactly” what you “should do.” The door is left wide open by this statement. My question is: what marriage when it has soured, does not hinder a Christian’s service to God? Once *attitudes of* *resignation* (which are encouraged by brother Willis’ reasoning) rather than *resolve* are employed by those in troubled marriages, they are doomed to failure and spiritual stumbling blocks. Without any authority from the Master (cf. Col. 3:17; I P. 4:11), brother Mike employs rank humanism to justify further exceptions to the Lord’s MDR rule, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder” (Mt. 19:6; cp. w. Col. 2:8). It is obvious that a mate may TEMPORARILY flee for his / her life and / or the lives of the children, but to return when things are safe is imperative (cf. I Sam. 18-27; Rom. 15:4). Never are we given the right to throw up our hands in resignation when things get difficult, but we are commanded to patiently work through our problems with the help of the Lord. In I Peter 3:1-6, the apostles’ charge to those who are married to harsh mates is the very opposite of brother Mike’s teaching (cf. Mt. 15:14).
6.	Ron Halbrook: *Sermon entitled "Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage"* at The Carriage Drive church of Christ, Beckley, WV (5-30-91).**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: "The conclusion is this: unscriptural divorce releases neither party from marriage." Contrary to the Biblical teaching outlined in Matthews 19:6, 9 and I Corinthians 7:11, Ron teaches that an unscriptural divorce does not release one from marriage. While those involved in both sides of this controversy agree that it does not release one from the bond that God has imposed, there is a clear difference between the marriage (which man joins himself in) and the bond (which God solely controls). It is because man has the ability to divorce (in cases where the bond remains), that God prohibits remarriage.
7.	Ron Halbrook: *Sermon entitled "Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage"* at The Carriage Drive church of Christ, Beckley, WV (5-30-91).**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: "Now when we preach these things today, we’re accused of causing division. Dear friend, I want you to remember, departure from the authority of God’s word results in division. And the one who introduces error splits the log. Who causes division? The one that promotes a perverted gospel. Those that introduced the missionary society drove the wedge of human law that divided the Lord’s church. Those that drove the wedge of instrumental music divided the church. Not those that opposed it! Those that opposed it were pleading for scriptural authority, scriptural unity. But those that introduce the perverted theories of men divide the church. So it is with premillennialism, benevolent societies, the Herald of Truth, the sponsoring church and so it is with these new laws and theories and speculations and perversions concerning marriage and divorce. And there any number of them. Some talk about the Kingdom law, Matthew 19:9 only for the church. Some talk about baptism changing your marital status. Here you are in adultery—baptize you—and now you’re not in adultery anymore. You’re in the same marriage but just, mumbo jumbo, went through the water and the same marriage is not adultery anymore. And then some redefine adultery so that it is not a sexual act at all. And then some say the fornicator can marry another. And some talk about that exception on the basis of desertion. These theories are not taught in God’s word. And listen friend, when we oppose the theories we’re not causing division. What’s causing division then? The theories of men!" Brother Halbrook explains who is responsible for division in the church, when error is promoted.
8.	Ron Halbrook: *Sermon entitled "Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage"* at The Carriage Drive church of Christ, Beckley, WV (5-30-91).**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: "Kittel, in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 4, page 733 said, ‘The remarriage of a man after divorcing his wife or the remarrying of the divorced woman is tantamount to adultery, Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9.’ In other words, Jesus regards these cases as adultery. He makes them equivalent to adultery, equal to adultery. They are adultery, and so tantamount—equal in significance, and the effect of such conduct, Galatians 5:19-21, it’s the work of the flesh and we cannot inherit the Kingdom. Hebrews 13:4: God will judge those who are guilty. And so, now in defining that word adultery, it appears to be defined by use." Ron quotes from Kittel’s Theological Dictionary, which clearly contradicts Ron’s "application."
9.	Ron Halbrook: *Sermon entitled "Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage"* at The Carriage Drive church of Christ, Beckley, WV (5-30-91).**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: "One theory after another. Brethren, if we’re going to open the door to one of these because some beloved brother taught it, how are we gonna keep the others out? On what basis, on what principle can we keep any of them out? So we just give up the purity of the church. Some have pled, 'Well we can solve all of this with Romans 14, because Romans 14 says receive one another even where there were differences.' Yes, it did say that. But did you know II John 9-11 said not to receive one another when there are differences?" Ron condemns the theories of men, regardless of who the advocates of those theories might be. He rightly points out that when we seek to shelter such error under Romans 14, we “give up the purity of the church.” It is inconsistent then, for Ron and his associates to admit disagreement over some put away persons’ rights to remarriage, yet tell us that Ron’s “applications” (theories) belong in Romans 14.
10.	Ron Halbrook: *Sermon entitled "Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage"* at The Carriage Drive church of Christ, Beckley, WV (5-30-91).**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: "…and theories and perversions on the marriage question, then what are we going to do? Are we going to solve it with Romans 14? Do you see my point? If we’re going to solve it that way, you’re going to have to let all these other things in—and a thousand more and the church will be as someone said, ‘A veritable ark full of both clean and unclean beasts.’ Just people of everything. Now brethren, Romans 14 won’t solve the marriage question because Christ has a doctrine on this. And so, if we try to solve it with Romans 14 we just give up the purity of the church, throw the flood gates open—everything in the world will come in." Ron rightly condemns the idea of using Romans 14 to justify fellowship with the theories of men on marriage, divorce and remarriage. On the other hand, Ron and his associates are now telling us that Ron’s “applications” (theories) belong in Romans 14.
11.	Tim Haile: *Lesson entitled "Biblical 'Putting Away'"* during the All Day Bible Study; The Warfield Blvd. church of Christ, Clarkesville, TN (2-12-02).**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: “If I go put my wife away today, if I go divorce my wife today, there’s no fornication involved on the part of either of us, who has the right to remarry? Neither. Neither party has any right. Neither party has any power. What if one of us commits fornication? God said the other one has a power, has a right. Well, is that until the ah, guilty party makes the quick move, secures the civil divorcement? Is that until that. And somebody said, Yeah, that’s up until that point. No, I didn’t read anything about that in the Bible.” In brother Haile’s audio quote, he clearly approves of a second putting away and remarriage in cases that involve FORNICATION which occurs AFTER (not before) an unscriptural putting away.
12.	Tim Haile: The Q&A session after his *lesson entitled "Biblical 'Putting Away'"* at the All Day Bible Study; The Warfield Blvd. church of Christ, Clarkesville, TN (2-12-02).**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: TIM HAILE: Except it be for fornication, but, but go ahead. QUESTIONER: Does the exception clause apply to that clause? TIM HAILE: The exception clause has to extend to that. The exception clause has to extend to cover that. You see how, that by, by, uh, inserting the exception clause it changes the course of the passage. Now, an exception clause is just that. You have a rule, you have an overall rule, that is, if you divorce your wife, uh, and marry someone else, you commit adultery, and whoever marries her, when she remarries, they commit adultery. There’s the rule. The exception clause, it sort of diverts that, it redirects. What Jesus is saying is, without the exception presence of the, the, basis, presence of the cause, then both parties commit adultery when they remarry. With the cause present, it changes the scenario, it is except in cases of fornication, it changes it so that someone has a right to remarry without committing adultery. If you read the exception clause in, it works one way. We have this result. If you read the exception clause, take the exception clause out, you have an entirely different scenario. By one, the insertion of one simple little exception clause, Jesus created two different scenarios there – two entirely different scenarios.” In the following quote, brother Haile tells us that the exception clause in the first part of Matthew 19:9 also extends to the second part of the verse. This fundamental error paves the way for a second putting away and remarriage in cases that involve FORNICATION which occurs AFTER (not before) an unscriptural putting away.
13.	Ron Halbrook & Matt Renfrow: An Excerpt from the Athens, GA discussion with David McKee and brethren (July 27-28, 2000).	Play Clip!
DAVID MCKEE: But getting back to the divorce itself, you just defined an unscriptural divorce as just what that one fellow did. It does not engage the other party, that she’s not divorced at that point? RON HALBROOK: She is not dissolved from that marriage bond, or released from that marriage bond. It’s still there. DAVID MCKEE: Yes, we would agree on that, which is why it makes it adultery for her and him. But would you say she has been divorced at that point, when he divorces her, when the judge slams the gavel down, “I’ve said this on a case,” he has divorced her. Is she now divorced? RON HALBROOK: In an unscriptural, ungodly, rebellious sense, that man has a divorce paper. But I don’t see it as changing anything in divine law. DAVID MCKEE: No, and I don’t either. That’s why I think the other passages will say, “and he who marries her who is divorced.” That’s why it’s adultery, as well, because she’s still tied to that unfaithful fellow that put her away, and he’s still tied to her in this bond. MATT RENFROW: But you would take away that exception, at that point. DAVID MCKEE: Well, the exception was there when the first divorced occurred, which is the only divorce Jesus speaks of. MATT RENFROW: The only time the exception can be instilled? DAVID MCKEE: Is that what Jesus says in Matthew 19 and 9, or in other places? “If you divorce and it is not for this reason, here’s what the two of you are: you’re in a state where you are to be reconciled, or any remarrying is adultery.” But to say that divorce can occur and it wasn’t for that reason, but now, here are grounds that will allow for some kind of future divorce. That we’re still in the works of defining and making something that can really happen. I don’t see the Bible language that speaks of it.
14.	*Weldon E. Warnock, “Trouble in the Church,”* [WJLS, 99.5 FM (1-25-04), Radio program sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]**	Play Clip!
QUOTE: “…Well, another problem in the church, a cause of trouble, is binding opinions, and preachers are bad about this. There are others as well, who want to bind their opinions but preachers come along, and they have their own personal views and notions, and they impose ‘em upon the church and make them a law of God, ah, in their own minds. You know this is serious business, Ladies and Gentlemen, of binding where God has loosed and loosing where God has bound. As Jesus said to Peter, which was applicable by the way, to all the apostles, in Matthew 16, verse 19, “Whatsoever thou shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven. And whatsoever thou shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” And we need to be mighty careful. Paul writes in I Timothy chapter 4, beginning with verse 1, “The Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some should depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, ah – speaking lies in hypocrisy, it – ah and uh and uh, having their conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry and abstain from meats…”
15.	*Weldon E. Warnock, “Trouble in the Church,”* [WJLS, 99.5 FM (1-25-04), Radio program sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]**	Play Clip!
“…And then, here’s the latest one that’s come along, just in the last few years. And that is this idea that no put away person, no one who’s been divorced may remarry. Now, that is one of the most irrational, absurd positions that’s come along in a long time. Now, you think about it. Here is an innocent woman, faithful to her husband. He commits adultery and he beats her to the courthouse, puts her away, and because she becomes the put away, he won the race to the courthouse; she cannot remarry. Or he doesn’t want to be married anymore, he’s not guilty of adultery, but he’s got his eye on somebody else. And – and in just a short while after the divorce takes place, now here she is an innocent, faithful wife, he marries somebody else, or he commits adultery, he does the putting away. She can’t remarry because she’s the put away! . . .”
16.	*Weldon E. Warnock, “Trouble in the Church,”* [WJLS, 99.5 FM (1-25-04), Radio program sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]**	Play Clip!
“…The innocent party, according to the teaching of the New Testament, the law of Christ, may remarry if the mate, the spouse is guilty of adultery. Makes no difference which one gets to the courthouse. Courthouse has nothing to do with it. There’s nothing, neighbor, in Matthew 5:32, Matthew 19, verse 9, about a courthouse, or a judge, or a lawyer. Doesn’t say that: “Whosoever puts away his wife at the courthouse,” it doesn’t say that. Preachers put that in there, bless your heart…”
17.	*Weldon E. Warnock, “Trouble in the Church,”* [WJLS, 99.5 FM (1-25-04), Radio program sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]**	Play Clip!
“…Now, you just think of that, Ladies and Gentlemen. Now we hear a lot of this today, and this is to prejudice, but we hear a lot about ‘mental divorce’. What do you mean by ‘mental divorce?’ Ah – nobody believes that you can just think away a wife or a husband. No, no, no, no. Let me tell you something: marriage is mental. Oh, I know there are vows, there are external actions. And divorce is mental, though there are procedures, ah, that – that – differ from culture to culture and it may that there’s nothing you can do as far as ah – legal – ah – action, or the legal aspect of it, or the culture aspect. The Lord gives the innocent party the right to remarry. I’m talking about a innocent, scriptural, faithful spouse, may put away before God, if you can’t do it at the courthouse, and let him know that he’s being put away, and let others know why he’s being put away: for fornication. And that innocent party has a right to remarry. But we hear about this mental stuff. Everything we do before God, all duties that the Lord enjoins upon us, neighbor, are mental in nature. Yeah, there are external expressions and actions, but Paul said that he served the Lord with his spirit in Romans 1, verse 9. He said, ‘God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit.’ Now, everything we do to God, we do with the spirit, from the heart. Now, there are acts, of course, but we sing from the heart, Ephesians 5:19. We give, purpose in our heart, ah – II Corinthians 9, verse 7. We observe the Lord’s supper from our heart, ‘Let a man examine himself,’ I Corinthians 11, verse 28. We worship in spirit and in truth, John chapter 4, verse 24. And marriage is from the heart, and divorce is from the heart, Ladies and Gentlemen. So this mental divorce stuff, leaving the impression that you just think away a mate, ah – nobody teaches that or espouses that. Then here is the second putting away. Now that’s being bandied around, yeah, they have a second putting away. Well, no, no, no. Here’s the fornicator, here’s the guilty party. He goes over to the courthouse and files for divorce, and it – it goes through, he gets, gets a divorce decree and uh, here’s the innocent party; and then, uh, may she remarry? Well, she can ah – dismiss him, that’s what put away apolla – apoluo, in – in Matthew 19:9, Matthew 5:32, and other places means. A putting away, a dismissal from the house, a repudiation. Now, that’s what Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon says on page 66, under the word, “apoluo.” Now, may she dismiss him? Not talking about the courthouse, may she dismiss him – the innocent party, and marry somebody else? Indeed she may. She has, the innocent party has one putting away, neighbor, that this theory today, which is false in nature, does not allow. Yeah, here’s the guilty party goes, and uses the civil law to dismiss his wife or to divorce his wife, but she can’t use the law of God – to do what Jesus allows her or him to do, the innocent party? That’s nonsense! Now, this second putting away, you know I’ve heard that about second baptism. You baptize the first time, then baptize again the second baptism – no, it’s just the first one. That’s the one for the right purpose. Or there’s a second supper. And we don’t believe in Sunday night communion ‘cause that’s a second supper. Well, it’s not a second supper for those who are eating it (laughs), it’s just the one, don’t you see? And the second withdrawal; here’s a brother withdraws himself from the congregation, so the congregation cannot withdraw, or that’d be a second withdrawal. Not so, the congregation has a responsibility, and it’d be doing its job in withdrawing and that’d be a one (laughs) withdrawal, as far as it goes. And the same thing is true with this ah – ah divorce, Ladies and Gentlemen. The – the right of the innocent party, to put away the guilty party and remarry again. Well, there – there’s all kinds of things that’s being said and bandied around – ah – today, but I want to tell ya, when you get back to the New Testament, the Bible teaches that a man and woman are married for life and if they don’t want to live together and – and – some reason – something happens, and they decide, well, we’re going to get a divorce – no adultery’s involved, none at all, then neither one of ‘em has the right to remarry. I Corinthians 7, verses 10 and 11 plainly teach that. ‘Let ‘em remain unmarried’ – a woman who leaves her husband. And uh, she gets the divorce, that’s what’s involved in leaving, I Corinthians 7:10, and “let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband, and let not a man put away, a husband put away his wife.” That’s what Paul said. He doesn’t deal, address fornication, I Corinthians 7. Fornication isn’t in – addressed in Luke 16 verse 18, and the woman who’s been put away is a woman where fornication isn’t involved and obviously, if she marries again, she commits fornication – that’s so simple that a child can see that, neighbor. And we’re disturbing the church by preachers who fail to see it, and impose it upon the people of God and meetings are cancelled. There’s one the other day, there in North Alabama, meeting cancelled, preacher fired, good man, and he didn’t – didn’t preach on it, didn’t deal with it. But a question was asked in a Bible class, and he gave his – his conviction on it, and he said, ah, we can’t put up with that. This is what’s going on. And, uh, it – it’s just risen in the last few years. We didn’t have any trouble like that, ‘til some men started forcing this. But here’s causes of church trouble. We could also mention unscrupulous preachers. We could – we could mention the lack of discipline causes trouble in the church. A lack of leadership is another thing. There’s all kinds of reasons – contentious disposition. Some brethren you can’t satisfy, they – they can’t, they can’t exist if there’s not a fuss going on. They don’t like peace, and they just make mountains out of every molehill and they get it going, and hence there’s dissention and maybe division in the body of Christ. You know, the Bible teaches that the servant of God should not strive, be quarrelsome, but be gentle to all men, II Timothy 2, verse 24. But we have all these things that happen in the church and people become discouraged, and they leave, they quit, or they go to some denominational church because brethren can’t get along. Shame on us, for not being able to get along as the people of God! And there’s some things we never can settle, my friend, and there needs to be toleration and understanding with one another. Well, my time’s about come and gone. We appreciate so much you tuning in. If you want to call me, my number is 270, that’s the area code, 270, 237-9514. 270-237-9514. Or, you can write the Beech Creek church of Christ, and that address will be given as we go off the air tonight, and we’d be delighted to hear from you. Have a very good evening, and may the Lord richly bless ya, and join us again next Sunday night at this same time.”
18.	Weldon E. Warnock, [1-25-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
"Or he doesn’t want to be married anymore, he’s not guilty of adultery, but he’s got his eye on somebody else. And - and this short while after the divorce takes place, now here she is an innocent, faithful wife, he marries somebody else, or he commits adultery, he does the putting away. She can’t remarry because she’s the put away!"
19.	Weldon E. Warnock, [1-25-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
"The Lord gives the innocent party the right to remarry. I’m talking about a innocent, scriptural, faithful spouse, may put away before God, if you can’t do it at the courthouse, and let him know that he’s being put away, and let others know why he’s being put away: for fornication. And that innocent party has a right to remarry."
20.	Weldon E. Warnock, [1-25-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
"Then here is the second putting away. Now that’s being bandied around, yeah, they have a second putting away. Well, no, no, no. Here’s the fornicator, here’s the guilty party. He goes over to the courthouse and files for divorce, and it – it goes through, he gets, gets a divorce decree and uh, here’s the innocent party; and then, uh, may she remarry? Well, she can ah - dismiss him, that’s what put away apollo – apoluo, in - in Matthew 19:9, Matthew 5:32, and other places means. A putting away, a dismissal from the house, a repudiation. Now, that’s what Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon says on page 66, under the word, “apoluo.” Now, may she dismiss him? Not talking about the courthouse, may she dismiss him – the innocent party, and marry somebody else? Indeed she may. She has, the innocent party has one putting away, neighbor, that this theory today, which is false in nature, does not allow. Yeah, here’s the guilty party goes, and uses the civil law to dismiss his wife or to divorce his wife, but she can’t use the law of God ga - to – to – do what Jesus allows her or him to do, the innocent party? That’s nonsense!"
21.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-1-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“But here’s the innocent party, wants to salvage the marriage, doesn’t want a divorce, and she is put away or he is put away, then she or he becomes the innocent party, as the spouse commits adultery. Now that’s what the Bible teaches and that’s my convictions, and that’s what I’ve preached through the years. And ah, you know, three - three kinds of people, classes of people can marry: Those who’ve never been married, one whose spouse has died, and one whose spouse commits fornication, the innocent party may put away, repudiate the guilty one and remarry.”
22.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-1-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“But in Luke the sixteenth chapter, verse 18, Jesus said, “Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.” Now what does that mean, ladies and gentlemen? Well, really it’s self-explanatory. Here’s a man who doesn’t want to be married to a, a woman, doesn’t want to be married anymore, he puts her away. And if he marries again, he commits adultery. And then, whoever marries her that’s been put away commits adultery. Now, that’s what the Bible says here in Luke 16 and verse 18. But the exception is not stated in this verse. But in Matthew chapter 19, verse 9, which is fornication. Really Matthew 19:9 reads the same as Luke 16:18, basically, if you remove the exception in Matthew chapter 19, verse 9. Now, here’s a husband, puts away his wife - and just say you put away your wife, and you go marry somebody else, Jesus said you’re living in adultery. And ah – if you put away your wife, and ah, somebody marries her, and you don’t go out and commit adultery, the – the – then, ah then she remarries, of course, she’s going to be living in adultery. That’s how simple the passage is, neighbor. But you know, Jesus gives the exception in Matthew 19:9, of fornication. And the innocent party may put away, dismiss, repudiate the guilty spouse and marry again. And I want to re-emphasize the courthouse has nothing to do with it. The Lord’s marriage laws, stated in Matthew, Mark and Luke, and other places like Romans 7:2 and 3, and I Corinthians 7, verse 39, a few other places, ah really ah has not America in mind. Specifically applies to America, but you know what many of us want to do? We want to Americanize God’s marriage laws. And when we think of divorce, all we can think about’s the courthouse. Or a marriage, the courthouse. But you know, in other cultures, you don’t go to the courthouse. And in the first century, neighbor, among the Jews, the women were always the divorced, they were always the put away. The husbands always put away their wife, they gave them a bill of divorcement. Now, as some are saying wr - ah, ah, wrong - wrongfully, erroneously, that if the put away, regardless of the circumstances, can never remarry, then these Jewish women of the first century, and some many years after, could not remarry, though their husband was guilty of fornication and he put the wife away and married somebody else. She could never remarry, according to the theory today. But here in Luke 16:18, if a couple don’t want to be married, and want to – they, they get a divorce, and then one marries or both, they’re living in adultery. The couple doesn’t want to. But here’s the innocent party, wants to salvage the marriage, doesn’t want a divorce, and she is put away or he is put away, then she or he becomes the innocent party, as the spouse commits adultery. Now that’s what the Bible teaches and that’s my convictions, and that’s what I’ve preached through the years."
23.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-8-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
"And you can’t pray to Jesus, and that’s caused some problems, though Steven did, in Acts the sec – in Acts the 7^th chapter. And then we’ve got brethren today who are saying, ah – if you’re put away, ih – in a, in a divorce, an innocent faithful spouse is divorced by a fornicating mate, that the innocent faithful spouse cannot marry. Now, that is an opinion that is causing problems and dissention in the church of our Lord Jesus Christ. And you know, we weren’t bothered with this back just a few years ago. Some fellows have come along today, and they have become adamant and zealots for it, and ah, they’re right, it’s all black and white, and if you don’t agree with me, you’re a heretic, and that’s nonsense. Ladies and gentlemen, that’s the most absurd thing I ever saw or heard of in all of my life. And it’s opinion of men, and we better be careful about preaching our own opinions. You know, we have those who sit behind the computer, an – and they’ll type out brazen things, but when they’re challenged, ah, they, they just back off. Mmm, they’re just as quiet as a church mouse, to use the old saying. Oh no, I don’t want to have that, don’t want to have a public discussion. And we have some who think that a public discussion is wrong or improper, is unchristian. But let me tell you something, friend: In Acts the 15^th chapter, here certain men came down from Judea, they came to Antioch, North of Jerusalem about 300 miles. And they were teaching that you had to be circumcised after the manner of Moses, or the custom of Moses, in order to be saved. Th - they made it a condition of salvation, in order to be saved. And verse 2 states that Paul and Barnabas of Acts the 15^th chapter, had no small dissention and disputation with them. Now, in the New American Standard bible, it says, they had - ah, much debating. Why, there was a big debate went on at Antioch between Paul and Barnabas and these Judaizers, who were in the church, by the way. They were members of the church, and they came to Antioch and they were preaching this and trying to bind it on the Gentile Christians, Gentile brethren, and Paul and Barnabas took ‘em up. Ha – huh, yeah, and they had a debate. And so debating is proper, not to just debate to be debating, and debate on every issue, but there’s times when there’s dissention and misunderstanding and confusion in the church, neighbor, that there should be public discussion. You go down to verse 7 of Acts the 15^th chapter. They came to Jerusalem to meet with the apostles and elders. Here was Paul and Barnabas and others from Antioch, and here were these Pharisees who by the way, were believers. As the Bible states, they were members of the church and they had a big debate, extended debate at Jerusalem. Now, wouldn’t it be nice, ladies and gentlemen, if we could get some of these boys today, these brethren today, to debate this, on this putting away? And there’s a brother, a preacher in Southern West Virginia, who’s on the computer challenging a brother like Ron Halbrook for debate. Yeah, he’s been brazen. I want, I want a debate, and chided him ‘cause, brother Ron because he won’t debate. Well, Ron decided that’s not the - the best, ha, ha, as far, as far as he’s concerned, but I tell you what, I’ll do it. But I want to do it orally, and I want to do it publicly and I want to do it with the brother who’s causing dissention in the body of Christ, my friend. This is a serious matter, to, to, to upset the equilibrium of a congregation. It needs to be discussed. Now, then, are we ready? Will we do it? You know, this, this proposition to Ron Halbrook went out on the computer and the brother signed it Southern West Virginia, signed his own name. Well, if I sent a proposition, would you sign your name? And we could have a public discussion in Southern West Virginia, and get to the bottom of this, and see what the truth is. Now, they debated it, in Acts the 15^th chapter, and why can’t we debate an issue that’s causing disturbance in the church, friend, when a preacher binds and imposes an opinion, and it affects the church. Now, they were binding circumcision as a condition of salvation; This brother is saying that if a faithful, um, innocent party is divorced by a fornicating husband, or he divorces his faithful spouse, or faithful wife, and then he commits fornication, marries somebody, that she can never remarry."
24.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-8-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“And you know, we weren’t bothered with this back just a few years ago. Some fellows have come along today, and they have become adamant and zealots for it, and ah, they’re right, it’s all black and white, and if you don’t agree with me, you’re a heretic, and that’s nonsense. Ladies and gentlemen, that’s the most absurd thing I ever saw or heard of in all of my life.”
25.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-8-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“Now, wouldn’t it be nice, ladies and gentlemen, if we could get some of these boys today, these brethren today, to debate this, on this putting away? And there’s a brother, a preacher in Southern West Virginia, who’s on the computer challenging a brother like Ron Halbrook for debate. Yeah, he’s been brazen. I want, I want a debate, and chided him ‘cause, brother Ron because he won’t debate. Well, Ron decided that’s not the - the best, ha, ha, as far, as far as he’s concerned, but I tell you what, I’ll do it.”
26.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-8-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“This brother is saying that if a faithful, um, innocent party is divorced by a fornicating husband, or he divorces his faithful spouse, or faithful wife, and then he commits fornication, marries somebody, that she can never remarry. The innocent party can’t remarry (laughs), ah – va, though, put away by a fornicating husband. And, ih - if, if you claim that you can, then you have ‘em living in adultery. And adulterers, you know, can’t go to heaven. Now that’s, these are the consequences of this, of this doctrine. So let’s come on, let’s get with it, let’s see, ah let’s see if we put our, as the old saying goes, money where our mouth is and get down to the nitty gritty, the - neighbor. And see what the Bible teaches, and I’m ready to do it, I believe strongly what I preach, and have preached it all my life, that the innocent party – I don’t care what the circumstances are – the innocent, faithful party, who’s been put away by a fornicating husband or a, or a mate commits fornication, that God gives the innocent party the right to remarry.”
27.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“…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…” (emp. jhb).
28.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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?”
29.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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” (emp. jhb).
30.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
31.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
32.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
33.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
34.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
35.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
36.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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. 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.”
37.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
38.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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.”
39.	Weldon E. Warnock, [2-22-04 Radio program (WJLS 99.5 FM, Beckley WV) sponsored by the Beech Creek church of Christ, Meador, WV.]	Play Clip!
“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