The Unequal Yoke

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 81]

     It is rather astounding to observe how we become victims of traditional explanations of the scriptures and transmit them to others with no real personal examination of their validity. Perhaps no better example can be found than the common application of 2 Corinthians 6:14-18. We are constantly receiving letters in which good brothers and sisters cite this passage as the ground for their separation from those who differ with them about some of the things such as cups, classes, or colleges, which we have allowed to fragment the heirs of the restoration movement. I doubt that any faction has been formed in our generation whose members did not quote as justification for their action, "Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord."

     Although we have commented at some length about this portion of Paul's writings in previous years, it seems that little we have said has made any great impact. At the risk of being repetitious we are going to ask you to study again with us the implications of the passage. Let us first read it together so we may know exactly what the inspired writer said.

     Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion bath light with darkness?
     And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
     And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
     Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
     And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

     I think it is obvious that the expression, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers," has no reference to the marriage relationship. Certainly it would not be advisable for a believer to unite in marriage with an unbeliever. Marriage is such an intimate relationship that it requires much that is held in common by the two participants in order to assure the success of the union. In view of the fact that our religious convictions are entwined with our deepest emotional constitution we disregard at our peril the warning signs which grace the entrance to the highway of matrimony. But while all of this is true, the passage before us has nothing to do with the subject.

     To regard it as referring to marriage would be to violate two vital rules of logical interpretation. These are: (1) No passage must be so interpreted as to contradict the apparent meaning of another passage; (2) In any interpretation involving two passages, one of which is obvious and the other obscure, the obscure must always be interpreted in the light of the plain, and never the reverse. Whatever relationship is signified by "yoked" in verse 14, it must be culminated at once by action of the believer and the culmination must be abrupt separation (verse 17).

     However, the apostle had shortly before this written to the same brethren and in-

[Page 82]

structed those who were married to un-believers not to separate from them. He recognized that the unbeliever might leave and said, "If the unbelieving depart, let him depart." But any separation must be the action of the unbeliever, for the instruction is, "If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath a husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him" (1 Cor. 7:12, 13). That this has to do with marriage is obvious from the entire adjacent context as well as the usage of the terms "husband" and "wife."

     The "yoking together" in 2 Corinthians 6:14 could not refer to marriage for whatever relationship it signified must be terminated by the aggressive act of the believer. It would have been very confusing indeed for the Corinthian believers to receive one letter from the apostle telling them neither to put away nor leave their unbelieving spouses, and then receive another letter instructing them to separate from those to whom they were yoked. We must conclude, I think, that "unequally yoked together" has no relationship to marriage in this context. I believe that all such use of the passage has been misuse or abuse.

     Perhaps this is as good a time as any to point out that the general tenor of the passage indicates a corporate action. The purpose of separation is to form a people for God and thus to compose the temple of God. To "touch the unclean thing" whatever it might be (and we shall refer to it later), would profane God's temple. That temple composed of his sons and daughters, as living stones, is to be free from contact with defilement or pollution.

     We will follow the text in the King James Version, not because it is the best rendering, but because it is the one most commonly followed by those who refer us to the passage as justification for division among brethren. Immediately it becomes apparent that Paul was writing about two forces in the world which were antagonistic to each other. These had not one thing in common and for that reason no common ties should be sought between them and no alliances of any kind should be formed. There are two proper names used which have great significance--Christ and Belial. These are the leaders of the two great forces of righteousness and unrighteousness, of light and darkness. One determined where he stood by which of these he accorded his allegiance.

     Notice that there are six terms used to define these two conflicting hosts and six additional terms descriptive of affinity. In five instances a question is posed which shows that these are opposite and not apposite and there is no basis upon which they can establish any mutual relationship. The six terms used to identify the one group are: believers (by implication), righteousness, light, Christ, he that believeth, and the temple of God. The terms employed to identify the opposition are: unbelievers, unrighteousness, darkness, Belial, an infidel, idols. The word "infidel" in verse 15 is the same in the original as that translated "unbelievers" in the preceding verse. The six words of relationship are: yoked, fellowship, communion, concord, part and agreement.

     Let us now consider the conditions existing in Corinth which would give rise to Paul's special concern that those who shared in the promises should cleanse themselves from all defilement of the flesh and spirit. The city was so situated that it was "the mart of the Greek world." If you will consult your map you will see that the southern part of Greece is joined to the remainder by a narrow neck of land only four miles across. All of the land traffic from north to south must pass across this narrow strip because there was no way to bypass it. The city of Corinth stood athwart this little neck which made southern Greece a peninsula instead of an island.

     While north and south traffic was funneled through Corinth by necessity, most of the east and west shipping passed through the city by choice. It was a little more than two hundred miles around Cape Malea from the suburban harbor

[Page 83]

town of Lechaeum on the west to the suburban harbor town of Cenchrea on the east. This was a dangerous and dreaded journey because sailing conditions were so hazardous around the cape that the sailors had a proverbial saying, "Let him who sails around Malea first make his will." For that reason most small boats were placed on rollers and dragged across the four mile isthmus, while the cargo of larger vessels was transported by porters and cartage companies to be loaded on other vessels.

     All the rich luxury items of the ancient world passed through Corinth and since it was easier to sell at a reduction than to trans-ship their commodities, importers and exporters alike clustered in the city. Banking and exchange firms flourished. Money was easy to come by and easy to spend. Merchants, traders, salesmen and sailors, of every nation and color, congregated here, seeking pleasure and profligacy. Men had time and wealth to spare and to spend and the city administration did not hesitate to advertise Corinth as "the good time capital of the world." Gambling, vice and viciousness were syndicated, encouraged and protected by law.

     The very name of Corinth came to be a symbol for loose morals. The expression "to Corinthianize" was universally used to describe drunken debauchery. When a Corinthian was depicted in one of the dramas he was always shown as a staggering drunk. This was bad enough, but to make matters worse Corinth was also the home of the temple of Aphrodite, goddess of passion and love. High on the Acropolis, jutting above the city proper, this famous (or infamous) structure could be seen from afar by the sailors, and it drew them as moths are drawn to the candle flame. Here there dwelt a thousand priestesses who were cult prostitutes, trained and skilled in the art of solicitation for their nefarious trade. Each evening at dusk they descended upon the city below and swarmed through the streets accosting all whom they met. The money they received went into the temple coffers. Immorality was colored by religion until vice was translated into virtue.

     It is not at all strange in such a place to hear the apostle say, "Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you" (1 Cor. 6:10, 11). Nor does it seem at all incongruous that he should write to the congregation of saints in such a city, "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that he who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her?" (1 Cor. 6:15, 16). It is interesting that in the same conjunction he mentions that, "Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God. You are not your own, you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body." The temple of God's love is contrasted with the temple of pagan love. In one, a man joined himself to a prostitute and became one body with her; in the other he joined himself to God and became one spirit with him (1 Cor. 6:17).

     Certainly it does not excuse the congregation, but it may help to explain why they continued arrogantly on their way while tolerating in their number one guilty of a type of immorality not even condoned by the pagans, "for a man is living with his father's wife." Those who were swimming in a veritable sea of vice and who "would need to go out of the world" to escape contact with "the immoral of this world" (1 Cor. 5:9, 10) could become so accustomed to immorality that it would make but little impression upon them, even in an aggravated form.

     It is interesting to note that in dealing with the immoral man, Paul recognizes two realms to which men may belong. Over one Jesus is Lord, over the other Satan rules. In the two sentences in which the apostle affirms his decision and gives instruction for enforcing it he uses the words "Lord Jesus" three times. The decision is that the man must be

[Page 84]

delivered unto Satan. One who does not recognize the lordship of Jesus over his life cannot continue to live with those who do. The judgment is pronounced "in the name of the Lord Jesus," it is to be executed "with the power of the Lord Jesus," and it has as its motive the saving of the spirit in "the day of the Lord Jesus" (See 1 Cor. 5:4,5).

     The pledge of allegiance to Jesus Christ implies the obligation to reproduce the life of Jesus in one's own life, that is to "cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, and make holiness perfect in the fear of God" (2 Cor. 7:1). There are two ways by which one can renounce such allegiance. He can declare as did the citizens in the parable, "We do not want this man to reign over us." Or, he can live such a life of abandon as to show that he has abandoned the life of Jesus. In both instances he rejects the rule of Jesus and must be delivered to Satan. "If you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin which leads to death, or of obedience which leads to righteousness" (Rom. 6:17).

     What we have thus far written will prepare us in a meager way to appreciate the implications in the language of the apostle in 2 Corinthians 6:14-18. Let us analyze his expressions. "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers?' Who are the unbelievers? What does it mean to be unequally yoked with such? Let us examine Paul's references to unbelievers as found in his letters to the Corinthians. We can thus determine what the saints in Corinth would understand by the term.

     Let us pursue the matter a little further. In 1 Corinthians 7:12-16 Paul deals with the marriage relationship. "If any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him." It is evident that the "brother" and "sister" in this case are the believers and the unbelievers are pagans. The unbelievers are those who have not given allegiance to Jesus Christ, a term which best describes the state of the believer as it is understood in new covenant terminology. To put it in other words, the unbelievers are those who have never responded to the call of God and are not in the church. This is evi-

[Page 85]

dent from the fact that Paul says in this connection, "Only let every one lead the life which the Lord has assigned to him, and in which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches" (1 Cor. 7:17).

     To phrase it another way, the unbeliever is one who is not a brother or sister in Christ, for the apostle contrasts them. "But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound" (verse 15). The unbeliever is the unsaved person. "Wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband? Husband, how do you know whether you will save your wife?" (verse 16). Let us summarize what we have learned about "unbelievers." They are outside of the church and are not saints or brethren. They are the unsaved, those who are not in Christ Jesus because they have never pledged allegiance unto him.

     When Paul admonished the saints to be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers, it is altogether possible he had in mind the provision of Deuteronomy 22:10, "You shall not plow with an ox and an ass together." The ox and ass are distinct species. One is alien to the other and they can never be merged. They are incompatible. One may yoke two oxen together which are quite different in many ways--in strength, temperament, color, markings, size, etc., but the law did not forbid this because they were both members of the same family or species. The original word for "unequally yoked" is heterozugea. Heteros means "another of a different sort or kind." The people of God are not to be yoked with an alien people, that is a people who have another god. "I will be their God and they shall be my people" (verse 17). But to treat others who have given their allegiance to the Lord Jesus as unbelievers, because they differ with us about some things, is to paganize them and is a grave insult to the one whom they recognize as Lord. A person who "sets at nought a brother" and discounts him as a pagan dishonors the Father!

     It appears significant that the apostle in a table of antithetical words, would employ one which he nowhere else uses in exactly the same sense or circumstance. The exact opposite of "righteousness" would be that state in which one has not yet received a right relationship with Deity, but this is not sufficiently expressive for that type of paganism in which the Corinthians indulged. In Romans 1:21-32 the apostle describes the condition of those whose "senseless minds were darkened" and whom "God gave up in the lusts of their heart to impurity." The "dishonorable passions" and "shameless acts" are there detailed, and a description of the "base mind" and "improper conduct" is graphically presented. This catalogue of criminal perversion which might well have been drawn from the daily behavior in Corinth closes with the words, "Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them" (Rom. 1:32).

     The word "fellowship" literally means "to share a common life." The one who was justified, for this is entailed in the word "righteousness" as here used, has nothing in common with those who "exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator." Only contami-

[Page 86]

nation could come from any intimacy or association with those of whom it is said, "they were consumed with passion for the bodies of one another" (Rom. 1:27). The hope of avoiding the unclean thing lay in coming out from among them to live a separated and segregated life, shut off from the vileness and malignancy of the profligate metropolis.

     To the early disciples, the moral and spiritual domain was divided into two realms--the kingdom of darkness and the kingdom of light. Over the latter Jesus exercised dominion while over the former "the rulers of the darkness of this world" presided (Eph. 6:12). Each of these states had its host of supernatural beings called "principalities and powers." In the kingdom of righteousness these were celestial, the angels of light. In the other they were infernal beings, the demons. These latter had conspired to defeat the purposes of God by the death of the Son, but, "He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in the cross (Col. 2:15).

     By taking from them their one potent weapon- -death--he made it possible for men to share in life in the Son. Those who were called were thus said to be "delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of his dear Son" (Col. 1:13). When in the domain of darkness they "obeyed the commander of the spiritual powers of the air, the spirit now at work among God's rebel subjects" (Eph. 2:2). Having been freed from the immorality and indecency which characterizes the children of darkness they are told, "Let no one deceive you with shallow arguments; it is for all these things that God's dreadful judgment is coming upon his rebel subjects. Have no part or lot with them. For though you were once all darkness, now as Christians you are light" (Eph. 5:6, 7).

     There was a koinonia (fellowship) of darkness and a koinonia of light. Each of these had its god. In Corinth, the realm of darkness worshiped at the shrine of Aphrodite; the children of light at the throne of the living God. Each had its temple in which the Deity was believed to dwell. The one upon the Acropolis consisted of stones piled up by the hands of men; the other was composed of living stones purified by the blood of Jesus. And because koinonia was generally expressed by eating and drinking together, each had its table. The apostle declared, "The sacrifices the heathen offer are offered to demons and to that which is not God, and I will not have you become partners with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the Lord's table and the table of demons" (1 Cor. 10:20, 21).

     Demon worship was always accompanied by secrecy and sensuality. It featured indescribable acts of depravity and debauchery. Every type of degradation and perversion disgraced the fertility rites of the pagans. The saints at Ephesus are urged to "Give up living like pagans with their good-for-nothing notions. Their wits are beclouded, they are strangers to the life that is in God, because ignorance prevails among them and their minds have grown hard as stone. Dead to all feeling, they have abandoned themselves to vice, and stop at nothing to satisfy their foul desires" (Eph. 4:17-19). In the same context the apostle says, "Take no part in the barren deeds of darkness, but show them up for what they are. The things they do in secret it would be shameful even to mention" (5:11-13). The King James Version renders it, "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those

[Page 87]

things which are done of them in secret."

     The word "communion" has to do with that which is held in common. The realm of light had nothing in common with that of darkness. They had their own objects of worship, their own temples, their own tables, their own rituals. Their initiatory rites were different. "When we bless 'the cup of blessing,' is it not a means of sharing in the blood of Christ?" (1 Cor. 10:16). "The sacrifices the heathen offer are offered to demons and to that which is not God" (verse 20). That which has not one thing in common has no communion, no common meeting ground, no community of interests. "Wherefore come out from among them and be ye separate, and touch not the unclean thing."

     In later classical usage the word was applied to the inhabitants of the underworld, to demons, Satan, and the invisible malign forces which inhabit the universe and carry out evil designs. As a proper name it is probably correctly spelled "Beliar" and this was the name of the "god of forests," the imaginary deity supposed to protect the wilderness regions. Of one thing we can be certain, it is a name associated both with demons and with idolatry.

     The apostle Paul knew there was only one God. "As concerning, therefore, the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one"(1 Cor. 8:4). But while he discounted the thought that the idol was anything, he did believe that idolatry was demon-inspired. He held that the whole false system was the work of hell, originating with the cosmic spirits of the universe, resulting from "seducing spirits and doctrines of demons" (1 Tim. 4:1). For that reason he writes to the Corinthians, "What say I then? that the idol is anything? or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything? But I say, that the things which the pagans sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with demons. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table and the table of demons" (1 Cor. 10:19-21).

     Here is a contrast between the koinonia of the Lord and that of demons. The two are utterly divergent. They have their own cup and table. They represent different "brotherhoods." There is no concord between them. Belial is the name given to the whole secret idolatrous cult of infamy at Corinth. Vine, in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, is correct when he says, "In the N. T.; in 2 Cor. 6:15, it is set in contrast to Christ and represents a personification of the system of impure worship connected especially with the cult of Aphrodite."

     A temple was considered by the

[Page 88]

Romans and Greeks to be the dwelling-place or sanctuary of the deity. So the apostle says, "For ye are the temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people." The word "dwell" is from a word which signifies "to take up residence, to inhabit." It differs from the term used to describe a traveler who stays for a night or two. God will establish a constant residence with his people. He will live in them and among them.

     God cannot share his glory with another (Isa. 42:8). He declared, "Thou shalt have no other gods in my presence. Those who are to be his people must choose him as their God to the exclusion of all other so-called divinities. They cannot continue in paganism and have God continue in them. For that reason the ultimatum is issued, "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you (2 Cor. 6:17).

     What is "the unclean thing"? Perhaps we cannot be specific, but in view of what we have learned thus far, and of the context in which the word appears, I should like to make a few suggestions. The word for unclean is akathartos, impure. It is used twenty-one times in connection with the demons who are called "unclean spirits." In Luke 4:33, it occurs in the expression, "a spirit of an unclean demon." Is it too much to conclude that since the subject is "idolatry" and this is demon-inspired, that the unclean thing relates to the sacrifices made by the pagans to demons and the licentious practices in connection therewith?

     Let us go a step further. Paul uses the word haptomai, touch, only one other time in writing to Corinth. The other occasion is 1 Corinthians 7:1 where he is dealing with sexual relationships or physical intimacy. To "touch the unclean thing" would be to engage in intimate relationship with the impure pagan rites. With these, God's children have nothing in common. There can be no fellowship, communion, concord or agreement, with 14 them. Only absolute separation can obtain where there is not a single item of spiritual approbation.

     This brings us back to our original theme, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers." The word heterozugein was a military term. It was used to describe one who left his own place or rank and joined himself to another company. If two opposing armies were marching through the land, this term was used to describe the man who deserted his captain and marched with the enemy. The "unbelievers" are the heathens. They constitute the opposing force of unrighteousness. To share with them in their service was to renounce allegiance to the Lord Jesus. A child of God had no business sitting at the table of demons.

     We must have no ill feeling toward those who thus behave. They are merely acting in conformity with what they have been taught. All of these good souls have my compassion. They have been reared in an atmosphere of party spirit and have been taught very little about the indwelling Spirit. Of course those who refuse to read what we write cannot be helped by what is here said, but others who discover truth can share with those

[Page 89]

whom we cannot reach and the word of truth will be diffused in spite of adverse attitudes. I should like to make a few definite statements about the implications of this passage.

     1. The Holy Spirit nowhere summons the "called out" to come out from among the "called out." The called out ones are commanded to separate from the pagans insofar as any participation in the worship of other gods is concerned, but God does not deliberately and designedly divide his children among whom he walks.

     2. In every instance in which division or separation among the children of God is mentioned, it is always condemned, and never sanctioned. The children are never commanded to divide and when they do so contrary to the will of God the Father, they are censured for such division and urged to repair the breach and to restore unity.

     3. Dissensions and divisions are works of the flesh and will debar from inheritance in the kingdom. To teach that the Holy Spirit authorizes God's children to separate from each other, and by the very act to create factions, is to charge the Spirit with advocating works of the flesh.

     4. If the Holy Spirit were ever to justify separation from brethren and the formation of another congregation, there could have been no greater opportunity than in the case of Corinth. That congregation embraced those who were in error in doctrine, practice and attitude. In spite of this there was not one word said which would imply that any of the children should come out from among the other children and create a cleavage in the family.

     The exact opposite is the case. They were admonished to "agree among yourselves, and avoid divisions; be firmly joined in unity of mind and thought" (1 Cor. 1:10). They were told that, "Anyone who destroys God's temple will himself be destroyed by God, because the temple of God is holy" (3:17). Again the apostle tells of the special dispensation of God, "that there might be no sense of division in the body" (12:25). His farewell message was, "Mend your ways; take our appeal to heart; agree with one another; live in peace; and the God of love and peace be with you" (2 Cor. 13:11).

     No greater injury can be done to the cause of our Lord than to confuse God's children with idolatrous pagans. The purpose of the command to "come out from among them and be separate" was to unite God's sons and daughters into a single unbroken family to bring the full impact of the holy witness upon the dissolute forces of Beliar. The temple of God was not to be disfigured by breaks and cracks, but to be a structure in which the stones were cemented together in love. To apply this scripture in such a way as to create, condone or continue division in the ranks of the saints or holy ones is to wrest it from its meaning and purpose and "do despite to the Spirit of grace."

     The party spirit perverts and warps the mind, producing "the will to divide." Those who are motivated by it will search the scriptures to justify their actions. The phrases "Come out" and "be separate are made to order for those who are psychologically conditioned for adjusting, or maladjusting disagreements by separation. All that is necessary is to postulate that "the unclean thing" about which the apostle writes is equivalent to the controversial point at issue and the body can then be fragmented without remorse or compunction. To each faction "the unclean thing" is that which they oppose, and ridiculous as it may seem to the scholarly, it is nonetheless a fact that some have equated "the unclean thing" with cups, classes, orphan homes or instrumental music.

     In actuality, not one of these has produced division. It is a false sense of thinking with regard to fellowship and brotherhood which is the real culprit. It is difficult to determine whether this has sired the party spirit or is an offspring of it. However, the two have been combined to create a vicious cycle. Unless this is checked we will continue to divide brethren and try to justify it until the family relationship is completely destroyed.

[Page 90]

     It will help us to remember one salient truth which is all too often ignored. The new covenant scriptures were written for the specific purpose of promoting unity in the family of God and any use of these scriptures for the purpose of encouraging division in the ranks of that family should be eyed with grave suspicion. We can undo many of the currently existing divisions and eliminate the possibility of others in the future if we will here and now abandon "the will to divide" for "the will to unite." Such an alteration of attitude will enable us to become peacemakers and assure that we will be blessed as the children of God. We can never be blessed so long as we un-Christianize and paganize the other members of the divine family by our misuse of the words of the Father of us all.