MARRIAGE IN THE LORD
[p. 235] MARRIAGE IN THE LORD
Genesis 22:20 - 24; Numbers 36:1 - 13, 1 Corinthians 7:39,40
JT The verses in Genesis have been suggested because they indicate that God provides beforehand for what is to follow: what may arise in His service amongst His people, and this includes a wife, constitutionally needed; so in view of the need in Abraham’s family, that is, in Isaac, the Spirit of God mentions these facts about Nahor’s family, in which we have Rebecca introduced. Wives are constantly needed and sought after, which is according to God. Marriages have a great place with Him, a great place in the testimony, that there should be wholly a right seed, Jeremiah 2:21. Hence would-be husbands should approach God as to this, as a matter that concerns Him, and therefore entering into His forethought and consequent provision for such need known to Him beforehand. If this were accepted by brothers and sisters alike, it would preclude mixed marriages, diverse yokes in this sense. It is said, “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing”, (Proverbs 18:22). But then God has forethought as to it, and would thus provide so that the right person may be found. And then parents, as in the following chapters in Genesis, ought to be concerned as to wives for their sons, and husbands for their daughters; the testimony should rule in such exercises and not merely seeking after financial or social advantages.
LCC Are you suggesting that the inheritance should always have a place in our minds in this connection?
JT That comes in in Numbers, as we shall see.
ESW Is it in your mind that Genesis 22 suggests that there is a family provided of God out of which wives should be chosen?
JT That is how the matter stands in Genesis. [p. 236] The sisterhood in the family of faith. Paul said that he had a right to lead about a sister as wife; a sister, then a wife. The patriarchs were marked by that, their wives were their sisters before they were their wives.
AMH Is there a spiritual connection in this scripture in Nahor being a brother of Abraham, so that you would not have a spiritual person marrying an unspiritual one even in fellowship?
JT Spirituality is the thought in the family status, not simply nominal fellowship. A person may be nominally in fellowship without a spiritual status. At the same time, fellowship is most important, and if both persons are in fellowship the matter is accepted by the brethren, and they would recognise and commit themselves to it, unless of course there was some specific defect; and then the persons themselves should be concerned about their spiritual stature. Rebecca is introduced here to show us that God does provide beforehand for His people. If a brother is to be used in the service as a gift, it is a matter of great importance to God, and if he is to marry, it should be to someone suitable. Paul said, as I have mentioned, that he had a right to take around a sister as wife, as did other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord. Surely God would be concerned about a wife for Paul, if needed. The patriarchs’ wives were their near relatives; the thought of sisterhood is there — and surely if God has given a man a gift. He thinks of him long ahead, and if he is to marry it should be to a suitable person; one who is prepared in that way. It is a matter of importance to God. He can do everything; why should He not prepare a suitable wife for a brother seeking one?
GAvS Has the Song of Solomon any reference to that when it speaks of a sister, a spouse?
JT It is Christ speaking there, “I am come into my garden, my sister, my spouse”, (Song of Songs 5:1). The principle before us is [p. 237] there, however.
WJH Would Isaiah 61:10 come in here, “a bridegroom decketh himself with the priestly turban”? He approaches the matter as thinking for God. If our younger brethren get that outlook in approaching the matter, there would be much more for God in marriages.
JT The “priestly turban” would certainly bring him into the attitude of prayer about the matter.
EBMcC Is it important to see the great concern of Abraham as parent in connection with the oath that the servant is made to take before he leaves to find Rebecca?
JT That is a great thing to consider, the parents’ part in the matter. She was to be of the same family status; that was the chief point with Abraham, also that Isaac should not be taken to where she was, but she was to be brought to him. The brother has the leading position as before God, and the wife becomes subservient to that. 1 Corinthians 7 states that marriage must be “in the Lord”.
Ques You spoke of family status; will you tell us a little more what is in your mind?
JT We have been alluding to the fellowship. A person in the fellowship is qualified, unless there be some specific defect, but then there is more than fellowship; the family link, and there is spirituality.
GAvS Do those spiritual feelings depend upon how far the rights of God are paramount in connection with the matter?
JT Yes. The bridegroom decks himself with the priestly turban, which shows he is dignified in a priestly sense. The attire of the high priest involved his intelligence; he had a turban with a plate of gold on which was engraved “Holiness to Jehovah!” and his sons had high caps. So that the man is not only governed by his mind and conscience, his moral judgment, but he has access to God about the matter as in intelligence and dignity.
JDU Would Abraham’s part in it, as stated in Genesis 18:19, come in: “For I know him that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of Jehovah, to do righteousness and justice, in order that Jehovah may bring upon Abraham what he hath spoken of him”? Does that come in in connection with the parental side?
JT If a man is to command his children after him, it would not only be his immediate sons and daughters, but his grandchildren. He would be concerned about their wives and husbands. Abraham dwelt in tents with Isaac and Jacob. He was concerned about his grandchildren, and he was at least a hundred and sixty years old at that time. He had carried on in this sense right through to the end of his patriarchal service.
GAvS Would that raise a question as to whom parents allow into their homes when their children are reaching a marriageable age?
JT It would, because affiliations should be made in the circle of the fellowship. There is a good deal of recognition of family status after the flesh, involving natural affinity. These things have to be watched, because at times persons are brought into homes, and their company is fostered because of natural affinity, whereas there may be no spiritual link. As to that, I am sure it is important to watch.
FJF Might the parents be careless when the children are young?
JT Yes. Natural feelings often govern parents in these matters, and the results do not add to the testimony.
JDU How far has the natural to be taken account of in relation to the family circle?
JT We have to take account of age. Disparity of age may occasion trouble. It was said of the daughters of Zelophehad, let them marry whom they please, him who is good in their eyes. So that we have to take [p. 239] account of the creative side. Although we may be spiritual, we never cease to be creatures of God, the thought of compatibility in this respect must be considered. It cannot be ignored, so parents should not influence children against their natural selection, because we must allow selection. They marry whom they will, but it must be “in the Lord”. For a godly Israelite wishing to select a wife, they were a good field to make inquiry in. They spoke “right”, Jehovah says.
LPM Do you see it in the parents of Moses in that relation?
JT Yes, the father and mother were of the Levitical family.
FJF Will you tell us what “in the Lord” embraces?
JT Entire submission to the Lord’s authority, practically, not merely formal confession.
WJH Would it include 2 Timothy as part of the Lord’s commandment, in that we are enjoined to separate from what is to dishonour?
JT Just so. How can you seek a wife amongst the sects? Not that I am speaking against them, but the fellowship forbids it. You say. They are Christians, but what is involved in the word Christian? The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch, but they had been added to the Lord, not simply a company of disciples. Barnabas and Saul had to do with their instruction as believers, so that we may be sure the authority of the Lord was received into their souls; hence anyone presenting himself or herself to be in fellowship amongst them must recognise the Lord’s rights; he cannot belong to a denomination formed by man, where the Lord’s authority is not owned.
ESW The scripture referred to in 2 Timothy speaks of those with whom we walk, and we should have no lower standard for a wife than those with whom we walk — “those that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart”,(2 Timothy 2:22).
GAvS Does “in the Lord” involve that there is a definite exercise as to coming under the direction and control of Christ, in view of such an important step? Does it indicate that we are subject to the divine will in connection with such a union?
JT It is so in every relation. “In the Lord” governs every relation of Christian life, and particularly the marriage relation. How can a marriage be “in the Lord” when one person is not in the fellowship?
Ques Would the mixed marriages referred to by Nehemiah come in here?
JT Quite so. Mixed marriages are one of the outstanding occasions of sorrow amongst the brethren.
AEM You spoke of those in fellowship as potentially suitable to one another, except where a defect exists. Will you say what is in your mind?
JT A person may be in the fellowship, but only in it in a restricted way. At Thessalonica the apostle pointed out that if a man did not work he should not eat. If he did not acquiesce in all the apostle wrote, they should shrink from him. I referred to anything like that, anything that disqualifies a person, restricts him in the fellowship.
AEM Have you not found in your experience that careless door-keeping has allowed persons to come in that are dangerous in that way?
JT Indeed. When they are in you have to wait for a specific cause to withdraw from them. But anything like that would be the exception, normally those in fellowship are potentially suitable. It is mainly a question then for both of the persons to decide before God whether they are equal spiritually, whether one would detract from the other.
AL Is it not in view of the continuance of the family?
JT The seed is to be wholly right. I know that is to be carried forward to a spiritual level, but 1 Corinthians [p. 241] contemplates that the children of believing parents are holy, that is, holy in an external way, not essentially; but their parents are holy as under God. He has had to do with them. These things are before God, and God comes into all of them, hence the importance of spirituality, because that in the parents is sure to enter into the constitution of the children in an influential way.
PL Do Aquila and Priscilla suggest that spiritual affinity which finds them in one yoke, one “neck” in the testimony?
JT That is to be continued in character as exemplary of what we are speaking of. It has been pointed out that they are mentioned six times in scripture: Aquila first three times out of six. They are viewed on an equality, although she is a subject woman. The Spirit of God mentions Aquila first three times, and Priscilla first three times. A very remarkable fact, and Paul’s allusions to them bear out that they were suitable to each other.
WRW Is “in the Lord” suggested in the salutations in Corinthians — Priscilla and Aquila salute you in the Lord?
JT Just so.
FI In the case of husband and wife finding something unsuitable in one another, would we say it is a marriage “in the Lord”?
JT It requires very keen discernment to pass judgment on such a marriage. There may be certain variations of temperament in husband and wife that God may use for discipline. That is another thing God may provide — a wife for a brother who is to be distinguished in the testimony; perhaps he may be a strong-minded man and she may have a difficult temperament, and may become a rod for her husband. This is no disparagement of a wife. God’s discipline is used to bring out the works of love and self-judgment in the saints. Then we have several instances of marriages in the Scriptures where a wife was more spiritual [p. 242] than the husband, and where he scarcely comes into the position of spirituality at all. Take Manoah the father of Samson, he was not equal to his wife. Divine communications came primarily to the wife.
LPM Also Elkanah, the husband of Hannah.
JT That is another example. There are several instances; the husband of the Shunammite woman scarcely qualifies as a husband of a spiritual woman, but still God worked out His thought. Nevertheless, in these cases I should not like to pass judgment too readily, because room has to be made for the exceeding grace of God.
Ques Was not Job’s wife used as discipline for Job, and in James we are told that the end of the Lord is reached in relation to Job?
JT A good illustration, so that if persons are in fellowship and unless there is something of a very extraordinary nature in the wife or husband, we should not discredit the marriage.
FI You could not apply that in relation to one who married one not walking in the fellowship?
JT I think it should be laid down that a person not in the fellowship is not suitable as a wife or husband of one of the fellowship. It is a mixed marriage, and ought to be so named. If priestly admonition is applied, priestly investigation having been made, and the person in fellowship refuses to listen to the brethren, it seems to me that such are disqualified for the fellowship.
FI Would such an one do damage not only to himself, but to the assembly also by his action?
JT Yes. He is carrying the inheritance outside the tribe to which he belongs.
FJF Would such a person have to be withdrawn from?
JT That is what I think. Great priestly care would be employed in the way of admonition and pointing out by spiritual instruction that the course is lawless:
[p. 243] no other word should be used. It is a lawless course. He may not think it, and maintain the plea that the person is a Christian; but it is a lawless course, and if that is brought to his attention carefully and graciously he should be convicted; but if he refuses he is lawless. He is disregarding the word of God as to marriage, and he is refusing to hear the assembly.
SEE You do not make a difference between a brother or sister?
JT They should be dealt with on the same principle.
GAvS Both stand in relation to the law of God.
JT It is a question of 1 Corinthians 7: only “in the Lord” is a brother or sister free to marry whom he or she will, and that implies the fellowship.
SEE Would you make a difference in the case of a person not committed to the fellowship in the breaking of bread, yet who is attending the meetings?
JT If one is not breaking bread, why is this so? It is disregarding the Lord.
Ques Is it a serious matter in such a case to extend limited fellowship in a private prayer meeting?
JT I do not see how the fellowship is thus maintained. If you look into the matter and analyse it, you will find lawlessness underlying the position. A couple who are Christians entering into marriage and whose faces are in the direction of the fellowship, although not breaking bread, is another matter. I should be free to join in prayer with them. The sons of Joseph take counsel here themselves. Numbers 36:1 - 4. That is to say, the brethren in this matter have to consider for the inheritance, and a mixed marriage is going to weaken our inheritance, taking what belongs to our tribe to another. Where one of the persons is not in the tribe as a sharer in the inheritance, the position of the locality is weakened by the marriage, for one of the persons is not in the fellowship. The matter is detracting from the fellowship. It is robbing us.
[p. 244] Ques Would they be vessels to dishonour?
JT It would amount to that.
JD Nehemiah 10:28 - 30 says, “And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites ... and all they that had separated themselves from the peoples of the lands to the law of God, their wives, their sons and their daughters ... joined with their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse and into an oath, to walk in the law of God, which had been given by Moses the servant of God, and to keep and do all the commandments of Jehovah our Lord, and his ordinances and his statutes; and that we would not give our daughters to the peoples of the land, nor take their daughters for our sons”. Has that a bearing?
JT It has. It bears on what we are saying as to the things the brethren arrive at in their counsels on a particular case — how the fellowship may be affected.
FW Would what has been said have a bearing on the attitude of the saints towards a brother engaged to be married to one not in the Lord? Should there be action when a person becomes engaged, rather than wait until they are married?
JT Of course an engagement is not binding in the law of the land. It is not marriage, but still when a definite link has been formed, that is the time to take initial steps; only to act finally on the matter before marriage may weaken our position. The circumstances would guide, but the marriage is the full act of lawlessness.
SEE There have been cases which could be cited where such a marriage has taken place, the brother walking happily with us, and has married one not walking with us; no action has been taken and his wife has become a good sister.
JT The over-ruling grace of God has come in, but that does not clear the brethren. The Lord is drawing attention to this matter; He is stressing that investigation [p. 245] should be made and admonition administered, and for a person to refuse to listen to exercises on these lines makes him unfitted for fellowship. The more you deal with a person who refuses to hear his brethren, the more lawlessness comes to light.
SHB It has been taught amongst us that one engaged has made a vow which is inviolable.
JT That is important — an engagement vow has been made; can it be broken? We will suppose that a person who has made a vow is in fellowship, and he is convicted in his conscience that he has done wrong before God in linking himself with a person unequal to him spiritually; were he to go to the person and lay the whole matter before her, would not God come in for him? There are ways to approach these difficulties. It is more than likely that the other would release him, or be convicted herself. You cannot in this way break a bond in marriage, but it could be done in an engagement if the two are agreeable.
AEM Would you say that the responsibility of the brethren goes back really further than the question of engagement, in that we have to see that the teaching of this is to be before young people — before their natural affections are engaged?
JT That is a very important thing as to instruction in families. Some families are brought up as prohibitionist, and they have a conscience on that line, and it is supposed that that conscience must not be offended, but it should never be there. Instructions as to temperance should, as the truth, be in the family, for every creature of God is good, being sanctified by the word of God and prayer, 1 Timothy 4:4,5. So as to marriage, mothers and fathers are responsible to instruct their children before they come to the age of marriage. God will help us; any effort on that line will bring God in. Why should a young brother seek a wife not in fellowship? Has he been properly [p. 246] instructed?
AW With regard to the children of the saints being holy, how is it so many of them are lost to the testimony?
JT Largely because they are not brought up properly. We admit other things for them than what divine teaching enjoins.
WJH The death of the widow’s son reminds the mother of her sin, and Elijah restores him consequent upon this, 1 Kings 17:17,18.
AW You fall back on the mercy of God.
ESW The question of the sovereignty of God should not be lost sight of. It is a matter of the sovereignty of God if some are lost or saved.
JT The sovereignty of God can be counted on, but then there is the parents’ watchfulness. How unfaithfulness in parents has contributed to what is in households!
WFS If that is brought before a young person, and he or she has not hearkened to the instruction of the parents or the brethren, what would be done then?
JT Deuteronomy 21:18 - 21 contemplates such a condition.
AEM While we are speaking of cases of those lost through mixed marriages, are we not losing many young men through the universities or higher education?
JT Indeed we are, and the question often comes up in one’s mind — why do parents send their children to universities? Is it solely that their children should have a means of livelihood? or is there a fleshly thought of having distinction in the family?
ESW What you mean is that the question of motive must come into view.
JT I am not judging the brethren, because very many brothers have gone through university courses. I am only speaking now as to motives. Why are they sending their children to institutions where the enemy has a big advantage?
JDU Baptism would beget exercise as to this [p. 247] matter.
JT Yes, that we should be consistent with it as to our houses.
WJH Would you say a word regarding a situation that frequently arises. Persons having marriage in mind, or for other reasons, formally withdraw from us so as to reach their end. Some feel we should accept this; they leave us, as scripture says, “they went out”.
JT I do not think such conduct should be let off in that way. The assembly is to reflect the judgment of heaven, and the person who has come nominally into fellowship has been recognised in that way in heaven, and there must be some balance to that. He can never be what he was before he came into fellowship; if he goes out there is something that has been recorded against him in heaven and the assembly should reflect that; and it seems to me the more you look into such a case the more evil you will find. It will often lead to other things. Investigation should be made of every such mention of going out of fellowship. It is apostasy in principle, it is not a light matter. They may not think so, but those of us truly in the position know that it is so, and it should be brought to their attention, and the more you investigate the case the more it will appear that lawlessness is at the bottom of it.
AMH Is it departing from the living God?
JT “If any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him (Hebrews 10:38)”. It is in principle apostasy. Why should we allow that to pass without a judgment? “God has judged your judgment” (Revelation 18:20); why should we not have a judgment?
LCC Does not the Lord allow the thing to be brought up before the brethren generally so that the individual and the brethren might be helped?
JT Quite so, a rebuke before all that others may fear.
CAI What would be the consequent attitude of the brethren towards such an [p. 248] one?
JT They go from us and draw back. We should, as judging the matter, regard them as under assembly judgment.
ESW How far should we be governed by Leviticus in relation to marriage?
JT It is remarkable how clearly scripture establishes its principles. In Leviticus 18, marriage in a variety of ways is prohibited. That ought to be observed in relation to our subject.
JSD What would you say where the law of the land goes beyond Leviticus 18?
JT I should go by scripture. The law is in the hands of the priests, so that as priests we are custodians of the law. It is a question of spiritual judgment; the letter kills, the Spirit gives life. It is a question of priestly judgment in all cases. Leviticus 18 gives a list of persons who are not to be linked in marriage; we can only understand scripture by the help of the Spirit of God. It is quite right, of course, to discuss what scripture says, and the Lord never leaves us in the dark; He says that “the scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35)”. In the types we have what is entirely spiritual; the priests, those guided by the Spirit of God, know generally what scripture teaches on any matter, Malachi 2: 4 - 7. Then 1 Corinthians 7 distinguishes between the commandment of the Lord and spiritual judgment in marital matters, and admits the importance of the latter as to points concerning which scripture is silent in a literal sense.
RT As to our attitude towards a young man coming to the meeting but not breaking bread, should he be invited to our homes?
JT If he is a likely case you try to help him. He should not be encouraged to enter into relationships in the household until the spiritual matter is settled. It is a matter of spiritual equality, not natural equality. The types govern these cases and the Lord would have us have recourse to the temple in considering [p. 249] them.
FW In regard to persons who grow cold and keep away from the meeting, what should govern us in regard to them? They may not have committed themselves to evil and yet are not coming to the meetings. I think you said that those that did not keep the passover were cut off amongst the people of Israel.
JT That is what I think. A specific law governing the case is Numbers 9:13.
FW Does it involve an assembly meeting?
JT Certainly; you will find other things if you investigate carefully.
Ques Is such a wicked person?
JT If he refuses to respond to the authority of the Lord, what is he? A lawless person is a wicked person.
WJH In a city like this, when a meeting of assembly character is called to deal with evil, often not more than a quarter of the brethren can come, but the Lord generally helps and a judgment is reached and we never hear any more in a public way. Some feel that does not provide for others who cannot be present to be exercised, and yet we have hesitated to extend the matter.
JT Why are others not present?
WJH Partly because they are unable to come, and frequently the room in which the meeting is held cannot hold those who otherwise might be present.
JT Absence at such meetings is often regarded lightly, but this is humbling, all should be present.
HDT Is there anything wrong in principle in a report being given to the saints of what has taken place at the assembly meeting? — the assembly meeting finalises a matter.
JT There is nothing wrong in principle, only it should be accompanied by some admonition to those who were not present!
AMH The main difficulty is to get a room large enough with the necessary privacy.
JT [p. 250] I have observed that an assembly meeting called after a fellowship meeting is very effective. Most of the brethren are generally there and the matter is settled.
JSG How would you arrange for those not breaking bread?
JT Ask them to withdraw.
Ques Is there an obligation on all the saints to be present?
JT It is an obligation; all ought to be present.
Ques Would a representative from each meeting in the city be right?
JT There is no suggestion in 1 Corinthians 5 of representation. The apostle does not say “the whole assembly”, but how could you be in Corinth knowing that such a meeting was being held and fail to be present? It would be your obligation to be there.
PL “They were all with one accord in Solomon’s porch”, Acts 5:12.
NBS A discipline meeting need not necessarily be very long. Would 1 Corinthians 14 bear on such a meeting, and would two or three words be necessary?
JT You are contemplating an assembly meeting for discipline and the bearing of a prophetic word at such a time.
NBS We wait upon the Lord for a word which would help the judgment of the saints. Sometimes a number of brothers refer to scriptures. I was thinking that we should be ready to accept a prophetic word.
JT Three would be ample, two more suitable, and perhaps one most suitable. Cumbersomeness should be avoided in such a meeting. 1 Corinthians 5 and Acts 5 indicate the opposite of much length. Of course patient investigation by brothers precedes the assembly meeting for discipline.
AMH I suppose it is a matter of witness, laying out [p. 251] the particulars of the case. I gather that all that should be done at the care meeting and one person is sufficient to give a summary of what was given to the care meeting.
JT One hundred brothers in Sydney look into a matter, and investigation is made; one brother well known states the case to the assembly, and another confirms it. I have no objection to a second, but I would accept what the one brother said. If it is not in accordance with facts the brethren, being present, would say so.
AEM Would you regard the care meeting as arriving at something definite in connection with such a case without taking on judicial function, or is it that the brothers in a city get the facts and then wait for something from the Lord?
JT The whole matter is tentative until we reach the assembly; but the brother who states the case would convey what the brothers in care have determined should be brought before the conscience of the assembly; then a word conveying the mind of God from the Scriptures aids the assembly in its judgment. James says, “I judge”, Acts 15:19, and the assembly endorses what James said. Peter and he had set out the mind of God in the matter.
Ques If a scripture has been read to govern a position, and another scripture indicates a different line, how would you meet the position?
JT It is a divided state which should never exist.
SEE Should a matter be brought before the assembly for judgment before brothers in care had reached a conclusion?
JT Acts 15 says that the apostles and elders came together to consider the matter. If anyone has anything that should be brought before such a meeting, he should state it there. In the multitude of counsellors there is safety. Proverbs 11:14. If we are subject to [p. 252] the Lord and to one another, we shall arrive at the truth, and the brother or brothers who present the matter to the assembly will, as dependent on Him, be helped of the Lord to convey the mind of God and so a true judgment will be reached.
“[p. 253] Notes of Readings in New York and other Ministry”
1940. (.Volume 149).