A Common Argument

Introduction

This study was originally written as a Guided Research Paper, presented to Dr. Richard Oster, Harding Graduate School of Religion, where it is presently in the library.

Since this study was first presented in 1980 I have been encouraged on numerous occasions to make it available to others. With the continued interest in the use of Greek in various discussions, particularly on the subject of divorce and remarriage, and much input from many who may have spent years in word studies but have little or no expertise in the proper use of Greek grammar, it seems to me that the information in this study is extremely important.

During the 19 years since this material was first presented, though not commercially published, it has been cited in several published works. Time and usage have not diminished but rather confirmed the validity of this research.

It is my prayer that making this material available will contribute to the search for truth. It will enable those who so desire to have access to the tools necessary to examine the text and reach their own conclusions.

May God bless all who come to His Word with an open mind and a heart eager to know His will, and may the materials included in this book be used to His glory and honor.

A Common Argument

It is axiomatic among most religious leaders of a conservative nature that those endeavoring to teach biblical subjects ought to seek to be as accurate as possible. It is also commonly accepted that "truth" does not need false arguments to fortify it.

Those who use false arguments damage their credibility both as teachers and students of God's word. Therefore an important facet of the scholarly process is to investigate every argument studiously before accepting it and appealing to it to resolve any particular theological discussion. To critically evaluate an argument, then, is not to indict its proponents, but rather to demonstrate an honest effort to ascertain truth.

This paper is put forth in an effort critically to evaluate an argument that is becoming more and more prominent in current writings and discussions among those people of the "Restoration Movement" commonly called "churches of Christ." This chapter will seek to demonstrate that the argument is prevalent within this religious group. In later chapters the argument itself will be critically studied with a view to discovering whether or not it is an accurate argument.

This study is in no way intended to question the integrity of any person cited as using the argument, nor is it the purpose of this paper to discuss the propositions in support of which the argument herein studied has been advanced. The validity of the propositions involved may or may not prove true, but that does not fall within the scope of this paper. Therefore, the focus of this study will be the accuracy of a particular argument.

What is the argument to be examined? It is the contention that "A Greek verb in the present tense and in the indicative mood stresses continuous or repeated action solely because it is present indicative."

For example, the Greek word λέγω, which means "I say" would, according to the principles of this argument, be translated, "I keep on saying." The accuracy or inaccuracy of this argument is a grammatical question, not a theological one, and it will be studied from that perspective in detail in chapter 2 of this paper.

But this opening chapter must demonstrate that the argument under discussion (hereafter cited as "the argument," or "the present tense argument) is indeed frequently appealed to by religious leaders of churches of Christ to solve theological questions. In order to show the widespread usage of the argument it will be demonstrated that it has been used by various authors in a number of different publications and varied settings within the above mentioned religious group.

The argument is stated in a book entitled How to use the Greek New Testament, as follows: "There are seven tenses in the indicative mood: The present and imperfect, which denote action continued or repeated..." ¹ This argument has been accepted and applied to various "brotherhood" issues with increasing frequency in recent years. For instance, the same author applied it to 1 John 1:17, saying, "'Cleanseth' is from the verb katharisei, in the present tense (indicative mood) thus revealing that it is a constant process..."² Another writer wrote in the Gospel Advocate concerning the same passage saying, "The words 'walk' and 'cleanse' are in the present tense which denotes a continuous process." ³

This argument is also seen in discussions concerning the thought that a child of God cannot sin, as portrayed in 1 John 3. Speaking of verse 9 one disputant in a debate said, "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin.. 'Commit' is present indicative and denotes continual action." ⁴ And commenting on verse 6, the author of How To Use The Greek New Testament argued that "...the verb sinneth not is the translation of ... {a} present indicative active..." He thus translated this verse "does not keep on sinning" solely on the basis of the present indicative form. ⁵

Dr. J. W. Roberts, who taught at Abilene Christian University and who was one of the few brotherhood leaders who completed doctoral work in the Greek language, commenting on this verse, suggested that "John uses throughout the section a present tense of continuous action, referring in each case to habitual action." ⁶ The idea of continuous action in this passage is valid based on contextual factors, such as the use of a present participle in verse 6 and a present infinitive in verse 9 which, in fact, may be the basis for brother Roberts' conclusion.

But perhaps the most controversial question involving the frequent use of the argument concerns "Divorce and Remarriage." In at least two different public debates held in 1977, disputants used the "present tense" argument to substantiate their positions. One argued that the "present middle indicative of moichao ... (means) that the individual keeps on committing adultery..." ⁷

In another debate one disputant not only repeated this argument, but carried it further, saying, "I am now affirming that the present tense verb 'moichatai' in Matthew 19:9, cannot mean anything other than continuous action." That this argument is widespread , among churches of Christ is further seen in the fact that a number of leading "Christian papers" have published articles using this same argument on this same issue in recent years For example, such publications as Firm Foundation, ⁸ Gospel Advocate, ⁹ Christian Light, ¹⁰ The Spiritual Sword, ¹¹ The Defender, ¹² and The Gospel Standard, ¹³ have published such articles.

The argument has also been disseminated in tract form by highly respected leaders, ¹⁴and a number of lectureships devoted to the divorce and remarriage issue have also used it. ¹⁵ New books are also being printed which advocate the argument, such as Your Marriage Can Be Great, ¹⁶ and a large booklet of charts entitled, "Charts You Can Use In Preaching, Teaching, Studying On Divorce And Remarriage." ¹⁷

Thus it is obvious that this argument is widespread within the churches of Christ, especially among many who are highly respected as religious leaders. It appears that this appeal to the present tense argument is a relatively new trend. The earliest use found by this writer was in 1951, and the most prolific use in dealing with theological questions was in the 1970s. But because of the wide respect many of these men and publications have deservedly received, there may be a tendency to accept the argument without first critically examining it.

For instance, in one religious discussion one disputant repeatedly appealed to the fact that a certain well - respected brother thought his opponent's argument was "fallacious, far out, and palpably wrong." ¹⁸It is likewise a real possibility that one may refuse to examine an argument critically because he already agrees with it, or the conclusion it supports, such as one reviewer who admitted, "This review has been written with a slanted view favoring brother ... because brother ... espoused the truth in this discussion." ¹⁹But regardless of the good men who propound an argument, or of the validity or invalidity of the conclusions defended, an argument must stand or fall upon its own merits. "Truth" does not need "slanted views" or "false arguments" to support it.

Having demonstrated that the use of this argument is indeed widespread among many good, respected leaders within churches of Christ, this study must now turn to a critical evaluation of the argument itself to find out whether it is accurate.