[Biblemat] "Mike Willis Responds!"

[Don Martin]

                                  Mike Willis Responds!
                                        By Don Martin


There are circumstances in which the presentation of the gospel must take on
very personal features, even to the point of providing names and addressing
the teaching of certain individuals (cp. I Tim. 1: 19, 20).  Mike Willis has
concerned not a few faithful preachers of the gospel.  The primary focus of
concern, as far as symptomatic expressions go, have been Mike's bold
teaching on divorce for causes other than fornication, and the emboldened
posture of the Guardian of Truth Foundation in preaching the gospel as a
foundation.

In the January issue of Truth Magazine, Mike speaks out and very strongly
accuses some of providing "false reports," engaging in "slander," and
"bearing false witness" again him.  These are, indeed, serious charges.  I
am referring to Mike's editorial titled, "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness
In Discussing Current Issues."

I read with great interest Mike's editorial.  First, I am pleased to see
Mike showing some interest and animation!  I was, however, saddened to see
Mike engaging in such subterfuge and equivocation.  Mike claims slander
against him in three areas, "False Testimony on Divorce For Any Reason,"
"False Testimony About Collectivities," and "False Testimony About Going
Soft."

In addition to being concerned in general as to Mike's defense, I was
particularly concerned because I have had a lot to say about Mike's
teaching, in warning others and in attempting to precipitate a written
debate between Mike and me.  I sincerely do not want to misrepresent anyone
and, so, I wanted to see if Mike in his editorial could set me straight on
his teaching and actions.  Alas, Mike has only contributed further confusion
and, I am deeply grieved to say, added more seriously questionable, to say
the least, behavior to his manner.  I do not take pleasure in writing such
material; however, Mike is in a position of exerting tremendous influence on
brethren and churches today, being the President of the Guardian of Truth
Foundation, now obviously much more than just a publishing company, and
editor of Truth Magazine, a magazine produced by the foundation.

Mike wrote:  "If brethren want to represent me correctly, let them state
that Mike Willis believes that a person is authorized by God to divorce his
fornicating mate for the cause of fornication, which cause gives the
innocment party the right to remarriage" (Truth Magazine, January, 2007, pg.
31).

Sounds exactly the same as what all faithful preachers teach, does it not?
What, then, is the problem with Mike Willis?

Mike follows this biblically correct statement with the following and herein
lies the problem:

"Other than that, there is only one reason I know of that authorizes a
person to leave a marriage - when he cannot live as a Christian in a
marriage.." (Ibid.).

I certainly do not know what all has been said relative to Mike's teaching
on divorcement.  However, all that I have heard and read has very accurately
represented Mike (see addendum).

In this special defensive as well as charging editorial, Mike after stating
the cause of fornication, the cause and only cause Jesus taught, mentions
the wife whose children are being "beaten" and then clearly advocates, ".a
woman may have no other choice but to leave the marriage" (Ibid, pg. 30).
By "leave," Mike also makes it plain that he means "divorce" (Ibid, pg. 30,
31).

I have said many times that, "Mike Willis believes and teaches multiple
causes for divorcement."  Have I been guilty of precipitating a "false
report," "slander," and "bearing false witness," Mike?  In Mike's editorial,
he appears to make a play on "cause" and "causes."  I have consistently
taught and debated for many years that there is only one cause for divorce,
the cause of fornication (cp. Matt. 5: 32, 19: 19, I Cor. 7: 2f.).
Therefore, while I do believe the woman in Mike's emotional argument in
favor of divorce for a cause other than fornication, the woman whose
children are "beaten so badly that they have broken bones," has recourse, I
stand opposed to her having the recourse of divorce (Ibid., pg. 30, 31).

Mike charges those of us who have publicly presented Mike as teaching more
than one cause for divorcement as being slanderers and committing the sin of
bearing false witness.  Where is his proof?  Is he not simply further adding
to his own list of sins by so charging?

Mike manifestly argues that he does not teach multiple causes (more than
one) for divorcement; yet, he even argues for more than one cause
(fornication) in the very same editorial in which he issues the denial!  In
Mike's sermon that he has preached, titled "When Is Divorce A Sin?," Mike
states the following:

  "a. A person may have to divorce his mate to break an unscriptural
marriage (Matt. 19:9). In this case, one is divorcing for the kingdom of
heaven's sake.

   b. A person may have to leave his mate to become or remain a Christian
(Luke 18:29-30; 1Cor. 7: 15; Matt. 10:34-48; Luke 14:26). In this
case, one is divorcing for the kingdom of heaven's sake.

   c. A person may be in a marriage relationship in which his mate runs up
bills which he has no intention of paying. In this case, one's
responsibility to God to pay one's bills would demand that he not be
supportive of his mate's ungodly behavior (Rom. 13:8).

   d. A mate may be abusive to the children (beating). A person has a
responsibility to bring up his children in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord (Eph. 6:1-4). To fulfill that responsibility, may require him to leave
his mate to provide for the children.

   e. There are some cases in which one must leave to have physical and
emotional health. One's obligation to serve God would require him to
preserve his physical and emotional well being.

   f.  Sometimes a couple becomes so alienated from each other, the
hostilities have reached such a point, that they must live apart."

Yes, I have said that Mike Willis teaches divorcement in such situations
involving a mate "running up bills" (cause c); not being able to maintain
emotional health if the marriage continues (cause e); and even in a case
involving "hostilities" (cause f).  I teach divorce for only one cause; Mike
has multiple causes.  The question is, "Is Mike being honest in his
editorial?"  "Is Mike himself not only guilty of furthering error, but also
of "slandering," spreading "false reports," and "bearing false witness"
against brethren who have correctly represented and challenged Mike?"

I submit that brother Willis needs to start conducting himself as a
Christian and instead of hiding behind his diversionary false accusations,
come to the plate and honorably be accountable and debate his cause!  All
the preachers who are a part of the Guardian of Truth Foundation and Truth
Magazine need to back off and take a very objective look at that to which
they have joined themselves.

While I have only focused on the first area of Mike's claims of slander
("False Testimony on Divorce For Any Reason"), Mike is guilty of the precise
same basic maneuver relative to "False Testimony About Collectivities," and
"False Testimony About Going Soft," at least, in the main.

Let me be plain and free of any hint of obscurity:  Mike Willis, you are
guilty of teaching false doctrine and even encouraging people to commit sin
by teaching your more than one cause for divorce doctrine and you,
furthermore, are guilty of sin by charging all who correctly challenge your
teaching as being guilty of "bearing false witness"!  (I Cor. 7: 3f..)

I close with Jesus' words:

"15: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but
inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16: Ye shall know them by their fruits.
Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17: Even so every good
tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil
fruit.  18: A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a
corrupt tree bring forth good fruit" (Matt. 7).

Addendum:  Mike contends that he only teaches one cause for divorce other
than fornication, this cause being what Mike calls, ".divorce for the
Kingdom of heaven's sake."  Such, nonetheless, constitutes "multiple," more
than one, cause for divorcement.  Under this second heading for divorcement,
Mike includes a number of specific causes.  Mike, to my knowledge, does not
advocate marriage to another, at least not immediate marriage to another, in
the position that he takes.  However, the full extent of Mike's teaching in
this area has not been fully probed, to my knowledge.

Cordially,
Don Martin  dmartinbtbq at comcast.net

Check out our Web sites:  http://www.bibletruths.net
Ask and receive a Bible answer  http://www.biblequestions.org
Simply click on the URL to visit these sites.  You may print out the
material for teaching purposes, see the copyright provision on the home page
of Bible Truths.