Open Side Menu Search Icon

    Index Downloading...

    The Watchtower, January 15, 1947

    Download: PDF — The Watchtower, January 15, 1947

    The Watchtower—1947

    ^HeWATCHTOWEK

    Published Semimonthly By

    WATCH TOWER BIBLE & TRACT SOCIETY 117 Adams Street - • Brooklyn 1, N.Y., U.S A.

    Officebs

    N. H. Knobb. President W. E. Van Ambubgh, Secretary

    “And all thy children shall be taught of Jehovah; and great shall be the peace of thy children.” - haiah 54:13.

    THE BIBLE CLEARLY TEACHES

    THAT JEHOVAH is the only true God, from everlasting to everlasting, and is the Maker of heaven and earth and Giver of life to his creatures; that the Word or Logos was the beginning of his creation and his active agent in creating all other things; and that the creature Lucifer rebelled against Jehovah and raised the issue of His universal sovereignty;

    THAT GOD created the earth for man, made perfect man for the earth and placed him upon It; that man yielded to unfaithful Lucifer, or Satan, and willfully disobeyed God's law and was sentenced to death; that by reason of Adam’s wrong act all men are born sinners and without the right to life;

    THAT THE LOGOS was made human as the man Jesus and suffered death in order to produce the ransom or redemptive price for obedient men; that God raised up Christ Jesus divine and exalted him to heaven above every other creature and clothed him with all power and authority as head of God’s new capital organization;

    THAT GOD’S CAPITAL ORGANIZATION Is a Theocracy called Zion, and that Christ Jesus Is the Chief Officer thereof and Is the rightful King of the new world; that the faithful anointed followers of Christ Jesus are Zion’s children, members of Jehovah’s organization, and are His witnesses whose duty and privilege It is to testify to Jehovah’s supremacy and declare his purposes toward mankind as expressed in the Bible;

    THAT THE OLD WORLD, or Satan’s uninterrupted rule, ended A.D. 1914, and Christ Jesus has been placed by Jehovah upon the throne, has ousted Satan from heaven, and now proceeds to vindicate His name and establish the “new earth”;

    THAT THE RELIEF and blessings of the peoples can come only by Jehovah’s kingdom under Christ, which has begun; that His next great act is to destroy Satan’s organization and establish righteousness completely in the earth ; and that under the Kingdom the people of good-will surviving Armageddon will carry out the divine mandate to “fill the earth” with righteous offspring, and that the human dead In the graves will be raised to opportunities of life on earth.

    ITS MISSION

    HIS Journal Is published for the purpose of enabling the people to know Jehovah God and his purposes as expressed in the Bible. It publishes Bible instruction specifically designed to aid Jehovah’s witnesses and all people of good-wllL It arranges systematic Bible study for its readers and the Society supplies other literature to aid In such studies. It publishes suitable material for radio broadcasting and for other means of public Instruction in the Scriptures.

    It adheres strictly to the Bible as authority for its utterances. It is entirely free and separate from all religion, parties, sects or other worldly organizations. It is wholly and without reservation for the kingdom of Jehovah God under Christ his beloved King. It Is not dogmatic, but invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures. It does not indulge in controversy, and its columns are not open to personalities.

    Notice to Bubtcribert: Remittance* should be sent to office in yonr country in compliance with regulations to guarantee safe delivery of money. Remittances are accepted at Brooklyn from countries where no office is located, by international money order only. Subscription rates in different countries are stated below in local currency. Notice of expiration (with renewal blank) is sent at least two issues before subscription expires. Change of address wben sent to onr office may be expected effective within one month. Send yonr old as well as new address.

    Please address the Watch Tower Society in every case.

    Offices Yearly Subscription Rate

    America (U. S.), 117 Adams St., Brooklyn 1, N. X.

    Australis, 7 Beresford Rd., Strathfleld, N. S. W.

    British West Indies, 21 Taylor St., Port of Spain, Trinidad

    Canada, 40 Irwin Ave., Toronto 6, Ontario

    England, 34 Craven Terrace, London, W. 2

    India, 187 Lore Lane, Bombay 27 Ba. 3/6

    Jamaica, 151 King St., Kingston

    New Zealand, G. P. O. Box 30, Wellington, 3.1

    Philippine Islands, 2621 lot. 2 Herran, Santa Ana, Manila *2.00 South Africa, 623 Boston House, Cape Town

    Translations of this journal appear in many languages.

    ALL SINCERE STUDENTS OF THE BIBLE who by reason of infirmity, poverty or adversity are unable to pay the subscription price may have The Watchtower tree upon written application to the publishers, made once each year, stating the reason for so requesting it. We are glad to thus aid the needy, but the written application once each year is required by the postal regulations.

    Printed In the United States of Am erica Entered as second-class matter at the post office at Brooklyn, N. Y„ under the Act of March 3, 1879.

    “GOD’S TRUTHFULNESS” TESTIMONY PERIOD

    The Testimony Period during February, stressing God’s truthfulness, will catch up the four-month-long subscription campaign for The Watchtower and Awake! and will carry it forward through this midwinter month. Hence, the same as during the campaign’s initial month, January, all active readers of these magazines will keep on offering jointly the subscriptions for both of these magazines, together with the premium of two bound books (Watchtower publications), all at the regular rate for the two subscriptions, namely, two dollars. By determined efforts on the part of all having strong convictions concerning the truthful contents of The Watchtower and Awake! the subscription campaign will suffer no lag during this month of heavy winter up north, and we believe your field-service reports for February will show this. Many Watchtower readers will want to swell the ranks of the house-to-house subscription-takers, and so we say to alT those who want to make a start during “God’s Truthfulness” Testimony Period: Write us at your earliest for all needed information and references.

    1947 YEARBOOK OF JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES

    The first postwar year of action by the Lord’s kingdom publishers in more than fifty lands is reported on in the 1947 Yearbook of Jehovah’s witnesses. This report was prepared by the president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. It discloses the growing magnitude of Jehovah’s visible organization and of the “strange work” he is accomplishing through it. Supplementing this interesting report is the president’s comment on the yeartext for 1947, together with a daily Bible text for the year’s 365 days and a comment thereon as taken from this past year’s issues of The Watchtower. The limited printing obliges us to post the contribution rate for this 1947 Yearbook at 50c a copy, mailed postpaid to you. All group units should combine the orders of their members and forward same here through the appointed servant, to bring about economies of time and expense at this end.

    1947 CALENDAR

    The yeartext for 1947 is “Oh praise Jehovah, all ye nations”. (Ps. 117:1, Am. Stan. Ver.) The Society's new calendar features this over a composite three-color picture that differentiates it from any previous calendar and shows the tangible agencies that will be used for time to come in extending the call of the yeartext to earth’s many nations. The calendar date-pad beneath is a real service reminder, designating the six testimony periods and the special objectives of the alternate months. The contribution is 25c a calendar, mailed postpaid, or $1.00 for five copies to one address.

    “WATCHTOWER” STUDIES

    Week of February 16: “Marriage," fl 1-23 inclusive, The Watchtower January 15, 1947.

    Week of February 23: “Marriage,"

    fl 24-44 inclusive, The Watchtower January 15, 1947.

    ANNOUNCING JEHOVAH’S KINGDOM

    Vol. LXVm

    January 15, 1947

    No. 2

    MARRIAGE

    "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”—Matt. 19:6.

    TEHOVAH performed the first marriage of man I and woman. Out of his own good purpose he J made all the arrangements for it. It was good in his sight. It brought the man and the woman into the proper relationship with each other. Jehovah God their Creator joined them together to be one flesh. It was not His will that any other creature should try to put them apart, not even death, for God set before them the prospect of eternal life on earth in a world without death. Hence he warned the man, and through man the woman, against taking the false step that would lead to death. The woman, under false information and without consulting her husband, took this step. This threatened to break up the marriage between them by the death or destruction of the woman. Not desiring the matrimonial bonds to be broken by the likely death of the woman for her ill-considered step, the man then took the disobedient step with her, to die with her and be destroyed. Nevertheless, in the long progress of time, after they had lived together for more than one hundred and thirty years, death did put them asunder. (Gen. 4:25,26; 5:3,4) That first human marriage ended tragically. Ever since then marriage on earth has meant trouble in the flesh for those in its bonds.

    2 “Until death do us part” is not the rule followed today in many marriages, according to reports. In Sweden an epidemic of divorces is reported sweeping the country; and in some population centers of Germany, like Berlin, divorces exceed marriages. (New York Times, October 13, 1946) The report of the Federal Security Agency of the United States Government as published in September of 1946 shocked many Americans, and shortly thereafter the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America asked its religious organizations to take action to check divorces. This first national report disclosed that 502,000 divorces were granted in 1945, which means 25 percent more than in 1944, which year had also set a record. Compared with the marriages

    1. Who performed the first human marriage? why? and how did It end? 2. What facts show that “until death do us part” Is not the rule followed in many marriages today? entered into during 1945, the 502,000 divorces signified that in the United States there was one divorce to every three marriages. (New York Times, September 16, 1946; October 20, 1946) Back in 1906 the number of divorces granted in the United States was but 72,062, which shows that in forty years the divorce rate has increased to 6.9 times, almost septupling. In 1924 it had only doubled, which proves that the greatest rise in the divorce rate took place in these last 22 years. In the year 1923, out of every 100 divorce cases 35.3 were on account of cruelty, 33.2 on account of desertion, and just 10.5 on account of marital unfaithfulness.

    8 The many grounds upon which divorces are granted today contrary to the Holy Scriptures prove that generally there exists very little appreciation of the worthy purposes and the high obligations of marriage. Very evidently very little regard is paid by professing “Christians” to the words of Jesus, whom they claim to follow: “What God has joined, then, man must not separate.” (Matt. 19:6, Moffatt} Very evidently, too, the great marriagewrecker, Satan the Devil, is endeavoring to bring marriage into disdain, thereby to reproach its Founder, Jehovah God. Undeniably one sinister motive on Satan’s part is to infect the true Christians of Jehovah God’s organization with a worldly contempt for marriage responsibilities and moral obligations and thus to lead them into this world’s reproachful conduct. For our earthly happiness and spiritual good the time is surely here to think straight upon this serious matter and hence to discuss marriage frankly in the present light of the Word of God. Not that it will at all check the downward trend of the world in this respect, but that it will honor the Creator of the marriage bond by showing his high and praiseworthy standard. It will also point his consecrated people to the paths of conduct that make certain their gaining eternal life in His new world.

    3. Why is the time here to think straight upon marriage and to discuss it frankly?

    THE PURPOSE

    ‘“Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled.” (Heb. 13:4) Those words of the apostle Paul are plainly words of advice or exhortation, as if to say: “Let marriage be held in honour by all, and keep the marriage-bed unstained.” (Moffatt) Back in Eden Jehovah God established marriage in honor among his earthly children. Adam was a human “son of God”, and Eve his wife was likewise a creation of God. (Luke 3:38) They were a perfect pair, perfectly mated, and their wedding took place before they joined in committing the sin of disobedience against God. The Scriptures plainly state the purpose of their marriage in the words of God himself. His words point us to the basic purpose of all human marriage, namely, the reproducing of members of the human family, to bring into existence more creatures of the human kind.

    5 Whereas the first chapter of Genesis gives us a general account of the creating of humankind, its second chapter gives us a detailed, progressive account of their creation. First of all, Jehovah God made the first man, Adam, toward the close of the sixth day of creation. Then was the time that man, the first man, was alone on the earth as the one specimen of his kind. “And Jehovah God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (Gen. 2:7,8,15-17, Am. Stan. Ver.) In such words God gave the head of the human family, Adam, His law commanding obedience, an obedience that was to be tested by the refraining from eating of a tree upon which a prohibition was put. Adam, the lone man, could enjoy everlasting life in an earthly Eden by continuous obedience to God. He did not need any human offspring to preserve his name, but was capable of maintaining it alone.

    • Adam was one of his kind on the earth, but God’s purpose in creating our globe was not that man should be alone in caring for the garden of Eden and supervising the earth. Adam’s single state was not evil in itself, but God saw how he could enlarge man’s joy and privileges, and could balance man’s position with that of other creatures on the earth. “And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him. And out of the ground Jehovah God formed every beast of the field, and every bird of the heavens; and brought them unto the man to see what he would

    4. How should marriage and the marriage-bed be held? and what waa the divine purpose in marriage?

    5. Who of humankind was created first, and with what prospect ahead? 6. What did God see it was good to make for Adam, but first after what bad taken place? call them: and whatsoever the man called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; but for man there was not found a help meet for him.” (Gen. 2:18-20, Am. Stan. Ver.) In unbelief critics of the Bible have misread this statement to mean that Adam was God’s first creature upon the earth and that there is therefore contradiction in the Bible because Genesis, chapter one, declares that God created the fishes and birds on the fifth day of creation and then other lower land animals on the sixth day ahead of Adam. But chapter two, quoted above, does not necessarily say or mean that all other earthly creatures were made after Adam and that Adam was once without even animal companionship in Eden.

    T In the Hebrew idiom, in which Genesis was written, there arises no difficulty as to the order of creation, and Botherham’s The Emphasised Bible correctly translates the Hebrew thus: “And Yahweh God said, It is not good that the man should remain alone,—I will make for him a helper, as his counterpart. Now Yahweh God had formed from the ground every living thing of the field, and every bird of the heavens, which he brought in unto the man,” etc. The Catholic Douay Version reads: "And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: ...” In such a way the Bible, in its first two chapters, agrees that the lower animal creation preceded man upon this earth.

    ’Animals made life interesting and pleasant for Adam, but they provided him no equally balanced companionship with them. The perfect man was not designed to commit with them any acts of union such as are later condemned in Jehovah’s law given through Moses, at Leviticus 18: 23, 24; 15:16; Exodus 22:19; and Deuteronomy 27: 21. By permitting man to come to know and to name all the animals God brought him to see there was no counterpart to man among all such animals. Those animals did not reflect man. Of course, God the Creator could have made other perfect men by direct creation to be Adam’s companions, but then they would have been merely brothers to Adam by being sons of God as Adam was. They would have been on an equality with him except in that he ranked first in creation. But such was not God’s purposed way for filling the earth with human creatures in His image and likeness. He purposed a “help meet” or “helper” for Adam, one to stand before him as his corresponding

    7. How is the Bible, Id its first two chapters, shown to agree as to the creation of animals and mankind?

    8. Why was no helpmeet found for man in the animals? and how was one provided for him?

    opposite, thus complementing him. Looking ahead to the first human marriage, Jehovah God now made such a helpmeet, such a helper as man’s counterpart. He induced sleep in Adam and then created woman by using a rib from Adam’s side as a base.

    9 Thereby woman was Adam’s closest fleshly relative on earth. Adam recognized that fact after God informed him of how He produced her. As her Creator-Father, Jehovah God brought her to Adam in his home in Eden to abide with him. Thus God consummated the first marriage. “And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman [Ishshah], because she was taken out of Man [Zs7i]. Therefore shall a man [Zs7i] leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife [Ishshah]: and they shall be one flesh.” (Gen. 2:22-24, Am. Stan. Ver.) Seeing that Eve was made from a part of Adam, she was, to begin with, of one flesh with him. Adam the man (Ish) had named the animals, and now he named her. He called her what he himself was but only with a feminine ending on the name (Ishshah), designating her as the female of the man order of creation.

    10 God did not mean for man and woman to live separate lives; they belonged together. Hence God caused them to be one flesh, in a most intimate sense, by bringing them together and uniting them in bonds of mutual fellowship and oneness of purpose. The apostle Paul reminds Christians that Adam and Eve were of one flesh by the manner of her creation, by saying: “The woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so [by reproducing of children] is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.” (1 Cor. 11: 7-12) By the bringing forth of children from this first pair all the human family is of one flesh, blood and bone, and is not a mixture.—Acts 17: 26.

    11 Adam quickly saw the purpose of marriage, for he spoke of fatherhood and motherhood. He saw the later effect of marriage by saying that the son who left his father and mother to marry a girl became one flesh with her: “And they shall be one flesh.” God set the example for this oneness of flesh by making the woman that he presented to Adam as his wife out of living material from Adam.

    12 God gave his blessing to this first human

    9. How did God consummate the first marriage? and wbat did Adam call bis helpmeet?

    10. How is it, due to God’s ordering of matters back in Eden, that the human family is not a fleshly mixture?

    11. How did Adam show be saw the purpose of marriage?

    12. How did God declare the purpose of the union of male and female? and thereby wbat did be constitute as honorable? married couple, and at this time it was that he declared the purpose of such a union of male and female. Genesis, chapter one, tells us of this, saying: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” (Gen. 1:27, 28) First, God created the man alone in the image of God. Then he divided the man into male and female by producing the woman from a part of Adam. He did this in order that they together might fulfill the duty of marriage and have a part together in filling the earth, the entire globe, with creatures of their land, with righteous and perfect men and women. The bringing forth of these male and female children was that they too might unite in wedlock and share in the carrying out of the divine mandate to fill the earth with humankind. Thus, by creating things so, God at the very start approved of the marriage-bed and constituted it an honorable, dignified, normal thing.

    “ It was, to be sure, an enormous duty that God set before this couple in Eden, namely, to bring children into existence and fill the entire earth with them. Yet, because of the largeness of the duty, God did not see good to create two or more wives for Adam and start bigamy or polygamy with him. God gave him just one wife, and who is there to say that this was not a perfect arrangement, even in the face of the necessities of the case? So, according to this original pattern, God ordained that the married man should have one wife with whom he should be one flesh. And Adam’s pronouncement that the bridegroom should leave father and mother and stick to his wife agrees with the way that God first ordained it. God permitted polygamy to come into existence even among his approved people of ancient times, but later he restored the original pattern as the proper rule of wedlock among the followers of his beloved Son, whom the apostle calls “the last Adam”, “the Lord from heaven.”—Matt. 19:9; 1 Cor. 7:2; 15:45,47.

    u From all the foregoing, therefore, the reasonable person can see that, Scripturally, the sin of disobedience of this married couple in Eden was not their delay or failure to begin fulfilling the divine mandate concerning populating the earth; and neither was it their having sexual intercourse with each other. It was in eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which God had

    13. What shows that bigamy or polygamy is not the normal rule for man?

    14. Wbat proves that the sin of Adam and Eve was not the having of intercourse with each other? planted in the garden before ever he created either Eve or Adam. Their eating of it was contrary to God’s commandment. It was not children that Eve sought by eating of the forbidden fruit. She sought the knowledge that the Serpent said would make her and Adam wise, open-eyed, and “as gods”, knowing good and evil. (Gen. 3:1-6) The Bible records the first time that Adam performed the marriage duty toward Eve, and this was after they had sinned and were driven out of the garden of Eden. It says: “The man had intercourse with his wife Eve; so she conceived and bore Cain.”—Gen. 4:1, An Amer. Trans.; Moffatt.

    15 The valid purpose in marriage is seen again in the way that God, at the time of the flood, preserved the human race from Adam. In that case Jehovah God instructed Noah to bring into the ark animals of every sort, but to be sure that there were at least two of each kind. God said: “They shall be male and female.” Why! “To keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.” (Gen. 6:19; 7: 2, 3) The flood records show that Noah had followed God’s original pattern for man and had but one wife, and his sons also followed their father Noah’s example by having each one wife; so that there were just eight humans preserved through the flood. (Gen. 7:13; 2 Pet. 2:5) Then showing that marriage has a right purpose and that the bed shared by the husband and wife is valid and respectable, the Bible reports Jehovah God’s words to them after they came out of the ark, saying: “And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.” (Gen. 9:1, 7) By the male flood-survivors’ then having each but the one wife, the original standard of marriage as established in the garden of Eden was set before the human family. In this respect it foreshadows what will be true of such married life on earth as will exist at the beginning of the new world of righteousness after the global flood of Armageddon’s war wipes it clean of all the unrighteous people.

    PLURALITY OF WIVES

    “ Not that this was actually the first case, but the first reported case of a man to have more than one wife at the same time is that of Lamech, the great grandson of the murderer Cain. “And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.” (Gen. 4:19) The fact that this was reported on a descendant of Cain does not say it was wicked back there and that God

    15. How do the flood records show the valid purpose of marriage? and what do they foreshadow regarding the New World?

    16. Whose Is the first case reported of plurality of wives? and why was It not wicked or illegal? condemned the practice back there. God gave no specific marriage laws to the descendants of Adam the sinner outside the garden of Eden. That was about four thousand years before Christianity was introduced with its definite commandments of God through Jesus Christ upon the subject. Hence, away back there at that pre-Christian date, where there was no definite God-given law against it, there was no violation of such law and the man Lamech cannot be condemned for having violated an ex post facto law that was made law first four thousand years afterward for Christians. This Christian law was not made retroactive against all those who had not lived up to this Christian standard previously. It applied only from Jesus’ time forward, and then to his followers.

    ” Whether the taking of wives on the part of the “sons of God” in the days of Noah was a case of having each a plurality of wives is not made clear. Genesis 6:2 simply says: “The sons of God [the materialized angels] saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” It was not any possible plurality of wives back there, but it was the intermixing of materialized angels in human form with the daughters of men to produce “mighty men” that God disapproved. This furnished one of the reasons why the Creator brought the flood upon that world of ungodliness and violence.—Gen. 6:4-7, 11-13.

    M After the flood, among the first cases of where a man had more than one wife is that of God’s own earthly friend, Abraham the Hebrew. The reason why Abraham married another woman while still having his freeborn wife Sarah again makes prominent the primary purpose for which marriage was instituted, namely, to produce children. Abraham did not give a bill of divorcement to his childless wife Sarah, at about her eightieth year, because of her barrenness, and send her away free to marry whom she wanted. Instead, he consented to the arrangement suggested by his wife Sarah and accepted as an auxiliary wife Sarah’s Egyptian servant-girl Hagar to produce a son. Sarah could claim this as her own son according to the laws of those times, because the son’s mother would be the slave-girl, Sarah’s property. Thus Ishmael was born to Abraham. But Jehovah God still fixed his favor upon the one-wife marriage by rejecting this son Ishmael in favor of a son to be born by Abraham’s original, freeborn wife, Sarah. After the miraculous birth of her lone son Isaac, his half-brother Ishmael became a menace to the life and happiness of Isaac, and with God’s approval Abraham now divorced

    17. Wu it plurality of wives or something else of which God disapproved when the sons of God married the daughters of men?

    18. After the flood whose was the first case of having more than one wife? but how did God show favor to the one-wife marriage?

    Hagar and sent her and her son away to marry whomsoever they would. (Gen. 16:1-4; 21:8-21) After twenty years of married life, Isaac did not divorce his wife Rebekah for her sterility, neither did he take a secondary wife, but pleaded with God for children by Rebekah. He was blessed with twins by her, Esau and Jacob.

    10 Jacob, through no direct intention of his own, was led into having several wives by reason of his father-in-law’s action. However, by the two sisters whom Jacob married, together with their maidservants as secondary wives, Jehovah God caused twelve sons to be brought forth to Jacob, to furnish the foundations for the chosen nation of the twelve tribes of Israel.—Gen. 29:16-30: 24.

    20 From the example of these godly men it is patent that their having more than one wife was not forbidden by God nor ruled against by Him as a sin on their part. A great grandson of theirs, Moses, was used to give the law to Israel, and concerning that law the apostle Paul says these words: “By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in [God’s] sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” (Rom. 3: 20) Now, that Mosaic law from Jehovah God did not brand polygamy among the natural Israelites as a sin and therefore ban it. The law recognized polygamy as already existing among them and so it merely regulated or controlled polygamy, stating the rights, privileges and obligations of the several wives and their children. (Ex. 21:7-11; Deut. 21:15-17) But, although God’s law through Moses allowed for the man to have more than one wife, the having of more than one husband was not permitted to the woman. Confirming this, the apostle writes: “The law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth. For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.”—Rom. 7:1-3.

    21 The married woman guilty of adultery was duly punished, not by divorce, but by being stoned to death together with the man that defiled her. (Deut. 22: 22; Lev. 20:10) The betrothed woman was considered the same as married, and hence when she committed adultery during the time of her betrothal to her bridegroom, she was judged an adulteress and sentenced to death. (Deut. 22:23-26) This explains

    19. How did Jacob come to have a plurality of wives? and with what result?

    20. What position did God's law by Moses take toward polygamy and toward having more than one husband?

    21. How did the law deal with a married woman and a betrothed virgin guilty of adultery? why Joseph, suspecting his betrothed virgin, the Jewish maiden Mary, of such adultery, was minded to put her away by private divorce proceedings; he wanted to spare Mary from being stoned to death. He was restrained from divorcing her, however, by being correctly advised by Jehovah’s angel concerning Mary’s condition. (Matt. 1:18-25) With good reason, then, the seventh and the tenth commandment of the Ten Commandments declared: “Thou shalt not commit adultery.... ; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.”—Ex. 20:14,17.

    22 The covenant of the Mosaic law which God made with the nation of Israel was abolished by Jesus’ death on the accursed tree. Then the liberty of having several -wives under that law passed, and a higher and more strict arrangement was laid upon Jesus’ followers. It allowed for only one wife to a Christian. This requirement is expressed concerning the overseers and special servants, their assistants, all of whom were exhorted to be examples to the Christian flock. It reads: “If any one longs after an overseer’s office, he desires an excellent work. The overseer then must be irreproachable, a husband of one wife, . . . presiding well over his own family, having the children in subjection with all dignity; let assistants be husbands of one wife, presiding well over their own families.”—1 Tim. 3:1-4,12, The Emphatic Diaglott.

    23 The elder brethren who were to be appointed to any special service must all fulfill that qualification respecting marriage. To that effect the apostle writes to Titus, saying: “Appoint elders [not novices or immature brothers] in each city, as I directed thee; if any one is irreproachable, a husband of one wife, having believing children.” (Titus 1: 5, 6, Diaglott; Rotherham) Some have understood this to mean men that have not remarried, not even after the death of the first wife. But evidently the thought is that of not having two living wives, whether it was according to the custom of the Jews among whom polygamy still obtained in the apostle’s day or whether it was by a man’s separating from a former wife on unscriptural grounds and remarrying despite that fact.

    SUBORDINATION OF WOMANKIND

    24 To some minds the double standard that the Mosaic law set up as regards man and woman may seem to have been unfair, and an unjust discrimination against womankind. According to that law, the woman’s place in the typical Theocracy of the Israelites was an inferior and subordinate one. But Jesus Christ and his apostles, Peter, Paul, etc., found no 22, 23. What Is the marriage arrangement laid upon Christiana? and how is this expressed by the apostle?

    24. Was the rule of the Mosaic law in subjecting womankind unjust? and why?

    fault with it. Paul, after describing the law against adultery on the part of a woman and the restrictions upon her as to marriage, said: “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” (Rom. 7:1-3,12) God’s rule in that Mosaic law which subjected womankind was in keeping with what he ruled in Eden after Adam and Eve fell. “To the woman he said, ‘I will make your pain at childbirth very great; in pain shall you bear children; and yet you shall be devoted to your husband, while he shall rule over you.’” (Gen. 3:16, An Amer. Trans.) The Roman Catholic translation reads: “And thou shalt be under thy husband’s power, and he shall have dominion over thee.”—Douay.

    25 The Bible history proves that thenceforward down to and including the time of the Mosaic law covenant it worked out just the way that God declared in Eden: man ruled over woman. Even by the order that God followed when creating the human pair, the man had the position ahead. He was made the stronger of the two physically and was charged with direct revelation from God. All this put a responsibility upon him. Logically he was made the family head. This fact the apostles did not overlook and ignore in the Christian church, and so they wrote: “A woman must listen quietly in church and be perfectly submissive; I allow no woman to teach or dictate to men, she must keep quiet. For Adam was created first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, it was Eve who was deceived and who fell into sin.” (1 Tim. 2:11-14, Moffatt; An Amer. Trans.) “In the same way, you mves must be submissive to your husbands, ... It was in this way that the holy women who long ago hoped in God adorned themselves. They were submissive to their husbands. Thus Sara obeyed Abraham by calling him ‘lord.’ And you are daughters of Sara, if you do what is right.”—1 Pet. 3:1, 5, 6, Moffatt.

    26 In the days before Christ this same dominance of mankind over womankind is seen in regard to marital affairs. The father did not let the daughter pick her own husband or express her choice as to the husband she wanted. Her father and brothers decided as to a husband for her. She was treated as her father’s property, for him to dispose of at a price, because he had transmitted life to her and had taken care of her bringing up. When Abraham sent his servant to .procure a wife for Isaac from among his relatives, it was Rebekah’s father and brother, Bethuel and Laban, that agreed to let her leave home to go to Isaac. The only question upon which they consulted Rebekah was as to when she cared to leave home. As payment for her, Abraham’s

    25. By reason of what was man responsible as the family head? and how did the apostles uphold man’s headship as regards the church? 20. How was woman's subordination also shown in the giving of persons In marriage, as illustrated with Rebekah, Leah, and Rachel? servant “gave also to her brother and to her mother precious things”. (Gen. 24:50-58) Later, Laban as the father of Leah and Rachel sold these daughters to his cousin Jacob, son of Isaac, for the price of fourteen years of work; and Laban, as father of the girls, decided that the elder daughter Leah should be given in marriage before Rachel. For which reason Leah and Rachel said to their husband Jacob: “What share or possession is left for us in our father’s house? Does he not treat us like aliens? He has sold us, and he goes on to spend all the price of our marriage!”—Gen. 31:14,15, Moffatt; Douay.

    Centuries later, when Jacob’s descendants were under the Mosaic law, these Israelites were subduing the land of Canaan. Then Caleb offered his daughter for a wife to the man that should lead in the capture of Kirjath-sepher. That city was the price that Othniel paid for Caleb’s daughter Achsah as wife. (Judg. 1:12,13) Later, David felt he could not pay King Saul the price or value of dowry for the gift of Saul’s daughter as wife. Therefore King Saul asked as the price the foreskins of one hundred Philistines slain by David in battle. David got them and paid them.—1 Sam. 18:22-27, An Amer. Trans.

    28 On the basis that a daughter is the property of the father and he has control of her disposal, certain laws of the Mosaic code were framed, not by Moses, but by Jehovah God. One such law read: “If a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.” (Ex. 22:16,17) If the girl had been betrothed or engaged to be married, she would have been considered the same as married. Her violator would have been killed, and she too, if she had willingly yielded to violation. But if she was an unengaged virgin, her violator was obliged to marry her, if the father was willing to release her in marriage. But when the father refused to give the girl to be the lawful wife of her violator, that did not relieve the man of paying dowry or gift money to her father. He must pay this over to her father as the price of having lawlessly performed the act of marriage upon the virgin. If the father consented to give the girl to him, how much must the violator pay for her as his wife? A later enlargement upon the above law tells us: “If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled

    27. How was this further illustrated in the cases of Caleb’s daughter and King Saul's daughter?

    28. How was the father's control further shown In the law governing the case where a man violated his virgin daughter? her, he may not put her away all his days.”—Deut. 22:28, 29.

    28 The man could never divorce the wife obtained under such circumstances. This was one of the limitations or restrictions that the Mosaic law placed upon divorce. Another was where a man after marriage tried to get rid of his wife by bringing false charges of impurity against her, thus to justify himself in the minds of others for divorcing her. If her parents proved their daughter’s husband to be a false accuser, then the law decreed this punishment for him: “Then the elders of that city shall take the man and punish him, fining him one hundred shekels of silver, and giving it to the girl’s father, because he slandered a virgin of Israel. She shall be his wife as long as he lives, without his being able to divorce her.” (Deut. 22:18,19, An Amer. Trans.) That fine, which was like balm money, was over three times the value of the life of a maidservant, which was thirty shekels of silver. (Ex. 21:32; Lev. 27:4) Also the fined husband must maintain this wife as such all the days of his life, which means that he had to give her the wifely dues, namely, food, clothing, and her duty of marriage. Also, the law safeguarded the rights of her children by him as compared with the rights of children he might have by another wife. (Ex. 21:7-10; Deut. 21:15-17) Such divorce regulations were a safeguard in behalf of the weaker vessels, womankind, in the nation of Israel.

    DIVORCE

    30 Woman’s position being such as it was, her subordinate place was shown also in this, that the husband might divorce the wife but no way existed by which she could divorce the husband. The man having bought the wife and she being considered his property, she could not divorce him. The first case of a woman in Israel to try to divorce her husband was where King Herod’s sister, Salome, quarreled with her husband, the governor of Idumea, and sent him a bill of divorce and dissolved her marriage with him thereby. This was accounted to be very strange, heathenlike; and the historian Josephus, who was a Jewish priest, comments thereon, saying: “Though this was not according to the Jewish laws: for with us it is lawful for a husband to do so; but a wife, if she depart from her husband, cannot of herself be married to another, unless her former husband put tier away."However, Salome chose not to follow the '.aw of her country, but the law of her authority; and so renounced her wedlock.” (Josephus’ Antiquities, Book 15, Chapter 7, If 11) The fact that divorce iction by womankind had begun to crop up in Jesus’

    29. How did that law constitute a restriction upon divorce? and vhat other law likewise restricted divorce, and for whose benefit? 10. How was woman’s subordination shown as regards the privilege >f divorcing in Israel? day or that he foresaw its entry among God’s people is indicated by his saying: “And if a woman shall put away her husband [except for fornication], and be married to another, she committeth adultery.” —Mark 10:12.

    11 In that connection Jesus referred to the divorce law that was written in Moses’ law as something granted to the Israelites due to the hardness or perversity of their hearts, but not as springing from God’s original institution of marriage in Eden. However, we notice that this Mosaic law concedes the divorce privilege to the man, not to the woman. It reads: “When a man taketh a wife, and marrieth her, then it shall be, if she find no favor in his eyes, because he hath found some unseemly thing in her, that he shall write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, who took her to be his wife; her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before Jehovah: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which Jehovah thy God give th thee for an inheritance.” (Deut. 24:1-4, Am. Stan. Ver.) Doubtless, in view of this law, King David did not have any sexual connections with his ten concubines after his rebellious son Absalom violated them. David let them be as widows.—2 Sam. 15:16; 16:20-22; 20:3.

    32 The bar against the former husband’s tailing the divorced wife back again was to prevent any scheme between him and his remarried -wife to force her divorce from her second husband or to cause his death in order that she might thus be free to marry her former husband again. But if her former husband took her back, it would be an unclean, hateful thing in God’s eyes. The first husband would stultify himself, because he dismissed her as unseemly and indecent to him, and now, after she had been lawfully joined to another man and used as that man’s wife, he took her back again.

    33 In this divorce law, the expression “some unseemly thing” or “some indecency” is literally in the Hebrew text “nakedness of a word or thing”. It does not necessarily mean moral uncleanness or violation. It could not mean adultery, because a wife committing adultery was to be stoned to death, not divorced. (Deut. 22:22-24) The Jewish rabbis of Jesus’ day interpreted this expression in two general ways, according to the schools of Rabbi Hillel I and 31. Why was the divorce law given to the Israelites, and to whom did it allow the divorce privilege?

    32. Why was the divorcing man forbidden to take his former wife back again after she had remarried another man?

    33. In this divorce law, what does “some unseemly thing” mean? and how did the rabbinical schools disagree over it?

    Rabbi Shammai. These two schools sprang up shortly before Jesus’ birth. The school of Shanunai held down the expression to mean unchastity or moral looseness, and the Sadducees agreed with this school, arguing that divorce is’not to be allowed except for adultery by the woman. The older school of Hillel, on the other hand, interpreted the expression more broadly to denote faults, deformities and shortcomings of the wife, even for such a thing as oversalting the food or spoiling it, or for not being as pretty as another woman who comes into her husband’s life. In course of time the grounds recognized by the rabbis as proper for divorce came to be recorded in the Jewish Talmud, and according to these Talmudic regulations we find the following to be the divorce requirements:

    44 The legal authorities among the Jews could dissolve a marriage (1) when the wife was guilty of adultery; (2) when she carried on secret intercourse with a man after her husband had warned her against it; (3) where marriage engagement has taken place but where the ties of kinship are those which the Mosaic law or some rule enacted by the rabbis forbids; (4) where the husband is stricken with a loathsome, eruptive, infectious disease.

    35 As to malting application for divorce, a husband could apply for several reasons, among which were the wife’s violating the bounds of modesty, for example, appearing on the street with uncovered hair or flirting with the young men; or where she raised suspicions of being an adulteress; or where she cursed her husband’s father in his presence; or where she would not follow her husband to another place; or where she refused for twelve months to let her husband have his conjugal rights.

    30 The wife, for her part, could apply for divorce if her husband, after marriage, became afflicted with a loathsome disease; or began to engage in a disgusting business; or treated her cruelly; or changed his religion; or committed an offense that obliged him to flee the country; or led a loose, immoral life; or squandered his property and failed to maintain her; or refused her her marriage rights as a wife.*

    GOD OR CAESAR

    37 Christians do not subject themselves to the Jewish Talmud and its traditions and precepts of men, yet many of the above Talmudic regulations assigning grounds for divorce have been taken into the body of laws made by the political governments to

    * See the Mishnah of the Jewish Talmud, Order No. 3, the treatise on marriage contracts (kethubtith) and the treatise on divorce bills (gittin).

    34. According to the Jewish Talmud what are the requirements for granting a divorce?

    35. On what grounds could a man obtain a divorce?

    30. On what grounds could a wife obtain a divorce?

    37. Why may the Christian not take advantage of all the laws of the Talmud or of “Caesar” in order to gain a divorce? which we commonly refer as “Caesar”. (Gal. 5:1; Matt. 22:21) All such divorce laws, whether Talmudic or Caesarian, allow citizens great latitude as to the chance to get a divorce. A person claiming to be Christian might legally take advantage of such provisions of religious or worldly laws to procure a legal divorce. But a Christian dare not let himself be controlled by what religion or Caesar legally allows if it is contrary to God’s righteous will. To do so would be a conforming of the Christian to this world for a selfish end. Remember, the Son of God declared the divorce law of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 to have been conceded to the Jews because of their hardness and mercilessness of heart; and since he took the Mosaic law out of the way by his death on the tree and brought his followers under a new covenant, the Christian must not selfishly seek to take advantage of something meant for the hardhearted. He should know that the Mosaic divorce-provision does not apply to him if he is married. The Christian looks to Jesus Christ, the One foreshadowed by the lawgiver Moses, and seeks the expression of God’s law through this Greater Moses. Otherwise, by conforming himself to an abolished law for hardhearted Israelites or to “Caesar’s” laws the Christian may render himself unclean and defiled in God’s sight.

    88 Jesus Christ pointed back past the law covenant with Israel to God’s original institution of marriage. He made it clear that pronouncements back there as to human marriage applied to his followers. Doubtless with the many grounds for divorce in mind that the rabbinic school of Hillel allowed, the Jewish religionists now came to Jesus and had him state clearly God’s law on this subject.

    89 We read: “And some Pharisees came up to him to test him, and they said, ‘Is it right for a man to divorce his wife for any cause?’ [This is a good question for today, when divorce laws are so liberal and when in the United States every county court, except in New Mexico, New Jersey and South Carolina, or about 2,921 such courts, has power to grant divorces, so that more divorces are granted in the United States in proportion to the population than in Europe.] But he answered, ‘Did you never read that the Creator at the beginning made them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two of them shall become one”! So they are no longer two but one. Therefore, what God has joined together, man must not try to separate [by divorce courts, evidently].’ They said to him, ‘Then why did Moses command us to draw up a written divorce-notice and give it to her?’ He said to them, It was on account of your perversity that Moses

    88. As to marriage, where did Jesus point back for the guidance of his disciples?

    39. What discussion did Jesus have with the Pharisees regarding divorce? permitted you to divorce your wives, but it was not so at the beginning. I tell you that whoever divorces his wife on any ground but her unfaithfulness [fornication], and marries another woman, commits adultery.’’’—Matt. 19:2-9, An Amer. Trans.

    40 Some ancient authoritative Bible manuscripts in the original Greek (such as the Vatican MS. No. 1209) add to the above the words: “And he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery.” (Matt. 19:9, Am. Stan. Ver.; Moffatt) But with or without these words, Jesus makes it definitely known that the free and easy bases for divorcing a woman among the Jews of that day will not hold good before Jehovah God and do not apply to his followers. He leaves no doubt about it that the woman divorced by her husband on grounds other than for fornication or unchastity is not really freed from her marriage ties to him. Consequently even if she goes through the legal formality of marriage to another man, the legalness of her new marriage according to worldly law does not clear her; she enters into adulterous relations with her nominal new husband. His living ■with her in adultery is merely legalized by worldly law, but in God’s eyes she is still the wife of the original husband. But where the wife is divorced because of having had unclean connections with another man, then by her act of adultery she had become “one flesh” with such man and had actually broken her unity with her husband. The apostle Paul underscores this rule when writing to Christians to whom this rule applies, saying : “Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he [at Genesis 2: 24], shall be one flesh. . . . Flee fornication.”—1 Cor. 6:15-18.

    41 The Christian rule as to divorce is made doubly strong, for Jesus previously referred to the Mosaic divorce-law in his sermon on the mount and declared that he set a different standard before his disciples. He said: “It was said also [atDeuteronomy 24:1, 3], Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: but I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery.” (Matt. 5:31, 32, Am. Stan. Ver.) Likewise, if she gets a divorce on unchristian grounds and remarries, a woman can force herself into an adulterous position before God. At Mark

    40. How, then, might one legally commit adultery’ and how had an adulteress, divorced, already broken her marriage tie?

    41. (a) How did Jesus make this Christian rule as to divorce doublv strong? (b) Why does not legality take away the seriousness? and what interests are at stake?

    10:11,12 we read: “And [Jesus] saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.” (Luke 16:18) By the laws of unchristian governments this might not appear serious and a divorcer might legally clear himself or herself in the eyes of human creatures. But the affair takes on serious looks when we remember that adultery, fornication and uncleanness are works of the sinful flesh, and those whom God judges as guilty of such works will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Gal. 5:19-21; 1 Cor. 6:9,10; Rev. 21: 27) Hence one’s interests in eternal life in the near-at-hand New World of righteousness are at stake. A married Christian, or a Christian inclined to marry a divorced person, has to take such interests into account before acting hastily for some selfish reason.

    42 According to the Creator’s purpose respecting marriage, a Christian may not dismiss his marriage companion for every trivial cause and get by with it in God’s sight. The marriage bonds stay tight and fast, with unfaithfulness of one’s partner being the only release. Seeing this, a Christian will think long and hard before undertaking marriage and thus tying himself or herself up. There is a chance that after marriage, “for better or for worse,” the Christian might find himself yoked to an unsuitable companion and thus be ill-mated and be subject to heavy burdens and nasty disagreeableness hard to endure with Christian fortitude. Being inspired, the proverb is true: ‘Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the Lord.” (Prov. 18:22) But this book of Proverbs describes good and bad wives, and to gain a good thing in a woman the man must get one that will prove indeed a wife or helpmeet to him, and not a grievous burden, hindering his Christian life and growth and activity. Jesus’ disciples foresaw such a dire possibility with no easy relief in sight, and hence the great seriousness of getting married. So they commented on what Jesus just said.

    43 “The disciples said to him, 'If that is a man’s position with his wife, better not marry at all!’ He said to them, ‘True, but this truth is not practicable for everyone, it is only for those who have the gift. There are eunuchs who have been eunuchs from their birth, there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the Realm of heaven. Let anyone practice it for whom it is practicable.”—Matt. 19:10-12, Moffatt.

    42. In view of what disagreeable possibility should a Christian pondei carefully before undertaking marriage?

    43. What comment did the disciples therefore make, and how did Jesus reply?

    “ For some reason or other, not every Christian in line for the Realm or kingdom of heaven will make room for the practical truth of what the disciples said about the inexpediency of marrying or what Jesus said about making oneself a eunuch for the sake of better serving the interests of the kingdom of heaven. But Jesus left it up to each Christian’s liberty to decide, and whoever could allow room in himself to accept this matter-of-fact truth, Jesus advised such one to do so. If he can make room for it, then he is a gifted one, having a self-control that is gratifying in itself and that leads to certain good results. Such one makes himself a eunuch for the

    44. (a) How do Christians make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven? (b) What will guide and determine In the Christian's tinal decision and choice on this matter? kingdom of heaven’s sake, not that he literally mutilates himself in the flesh (for God’s law at Deuteronomy 23:1 forbade his covenant people to mutilate Israelites to make them eunuchs), but that he dismisses married life from his mind. He devotes himself with singleness of mind and affection and bodily strength to serve God’s kingdom. Virgin maids can take a like course of action and enjoy freedom and blessings to themselves. Widows and widowers can display a like single-hearted devotion by not remarrying but by specializing henceforth on serving that which concerns the kingdom of God. The Christian’s purposes concerning the service of God and of His royal cause are the things that will guide and determine in the Christian’s final decision and choice.

    THE CHURCH AND ITS PURPOSE

    IT IS Scriptural, and therefore reasonable, to begin by saying there is but one real and true church. That is God’s church, which his Word calls the “church of the firstborn”, whose names are “written in heaven”. (Heb. 12:23) The writing of persons’ names in books on earth has nothing to do with making them members of The Church. Jesus informed his disciples that God would produce a church. It is not a building made with man’s hands, but consists of a company or organization of Christians, with Christ Jesus as the Head or Chief One of it.

    By the Hebrew prophets God had promised to send Christ, the Messiah; and the devout Jews who were faithful to God were looking for the fulfillment of that prophetic promise. Speaking to his disciples, Jesus put this question to them: “Whom do men say that I the Son of man amt” Various of his disciples answered: ‘Some say you are one of the prophets returned.’ Jesus responded: “But whom say ye that I am?” Simon Peter answered and confessed: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus then commented: “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matt. 16:13-18) Satan the Devil has seized upon these words of Jesus and has used them to spread one of the most deceptive lies that have ever been told. It is a lie by which millions of honest and sincere persons have been deceived and turned away from God and led into a devilish religious organization.

    …