If a husband does not fulfill his responsibilities, does his wife have the right to leave him for a

If a husband does not fulfill his responsibilities, does his wife have the right to leave him for a time?

No. Apart from threats or abuse that give justifiable concern for her physical well-being, separation is not an option. Paul writes about a mutually agreed separation so that a couple may more fully give themselves to spiritual pursuits (1 Corinthians 7:5)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 7:5). Even in this, he warns of the danger of temptation because of the separation. It is only "for a time."

A wife is not responsible for her husbands fulfilling his responsibilities; she is only responsible to fulfill hers before the Lord.

Separating to resolve problems not only opens both partners to temptation, but it moves them further apart emotionally and may reduce the motivation to resolve the issues in the fear of the Lord. Too often, a couple may end a separation in order to avoid temptation and in their rush, fail to actually resolve any issues. The net result is to more firmly entrench the bad habits that create the problem.

The wifes (or husbands) first resource is prayer, and a first step of progress is a mutual agreement to pray together for the help of God and for grace to be changed by Him. If there seems to be no resolution of the difficulties, seek the help of a trusted, trustworthy, wise, spiritual believer (or couple) who can effectively bring the Word of God into the circumstances.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Why do the 144,000 not believe "the lie" after the Rapture?

Why do the 144,000 not believe "the lie" after the Rapture?

Not all unbelievers will believe the Wicked One’s lie (2 Thessalonians 2:8-12)." TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 2:8-12). Those who believe the lie will previously have crossed a line of wilfully rejecting the truth (verses 10, 12). Only God knows the location of that line.

The 144,000 will be saved by a sovereign intervention of God, foreshadowed by Paul’s conversion (1 Corinthians 15:8;" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15:8; 1 Timothy 1:16)." TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 1:16). Although all believers will be taken at the Rapture, God will not leave Himself without witnesses. Following the Rapture, He will save the 144,000, making them a testimony established apart from any human instrumentality. They will be sealed and thus protected from the judgments of God that are about to fall on the ungodly (Revelation 7:1-8)." TARGET="_blank">Revelation 7:1-8).

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Does discipleship overrule responsibilities to the family?

Considering Luke 14:26," TARGET="_blank">Luke 14:26, does discipleship conflict with family responsibilities?

Disciples must obey "whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:20)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 28:20). Paul states that his writings are "the commandment of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 14:37)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 14:37). Therefore, Paul’s teaching that children obey their parents (Ephesians 6:1)," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 6:1), that husbands love, cleave to, cherish, and nourish their wives (Ephesians 5:28-31)," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 5:28-31), that parents provide for their children (2 Corinthians 12:14)," TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 12:14), and that all manifest the affection of brotherly love (Romans 12:10)" TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:10) cannot conflict with Christ’s requiring His disciples to hate their father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters.

Luke’s record of the Lord’s previous use of the word "hate" is in 6:27, where we are to love and express good will even toward those who hate us. Therefore Luke 14:26" TARGET="_blank">Luke 14:26 cannot teach absolute hatred toward our closest relatives when we are to love even our enemies. The Lord’s next use of "hate" (16:13) pictures a servant with two masters. If both give him a command, his response will involve either love, holding to one (same word as "holding fast" the faithful word, Titus 1:9)," TARGET="_blank">Titus 1:9), or hate, being heedless (YLT) of the other. Loyalty and its resulting obedience are the issue. This is relative hatred. The demands of our dearest cannot rival our loyalty and obedience to Christ. The security and comfort of cherished relationships cannot compromise our commitment to Christ. But let us be assured that to act in loyalty to Christ is to do what is absolutely best for our loved ones.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Was it God

Was it God’s will for Elimelech to move to Moab?

The story of Elimelech's decision is found in Ruth 1" TARGET="_blank">Ruth 1:

The answer to this seems obvious. God placed the tribes of Israel in their assigned area (Joshua 13:6)." TARGET="_blank">Joshua 13:6). His purpose for His people was to possess that land for Him, so its produce would provide offerings for His honor. Elimelech left his God-given heritage. He may have ration-alized his decision because conditions in Bethlehem were not right, as the famine indicated. He may have reasoned that he had to take care of his family’s need for food. Such pragmatic reasoning based on the wrong of others and the justifiable needs of his family did not change his responsibility to produce worship for God according to God’s revealed will.

In addition, God warned Israel of the snares (Deuteronomy 12:30)" TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 12:30) they would encounter by association with the nations around them. They learned to live with them, become associated with them, and become like them (Judges 3:5, 6)." TARGET="_blank">Judges 3:5, 6). In particular, the Lord made a clear distinction between His people and the Moabites (Deu 23:3)." TARGET="_blank">Deu 23:3). Eli-melech disobeyed the Lord both in leaving Bethlehem and in going to Moab.

To some, however, the answer is not so obvious, because of the good outcome of Elimelech’s action. In God’s grace, He brought Ruth into the royal lineage, thereby raised up David (Ruth 4:17)," TARGET="_blank">Ruth 4:17), and preserved the promised lineage of Christ (Genesis 49:8-10;" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 49:8-10; Mat 1:5, 16)." TARGET="_blank">Mat 1:5, 16). But God’s Spirit rejects the argument, "Let us do evil, that good may come" (Romans 3:8)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 3:8). The end does not justify the means. Solomon’s conclusion in his search for wisdom was, "God will bring every deed into judgment . . . whether good or evil" (Ecc 12:14)." TARGET="_blank">Ecc 12:14). We are accountable for the moral quality of our every action; God is responsible for the outcome. God graciously allows "redemptive good" to come from evil, but that doesn’t justify the evil. Judas’ betrayal of the Lord Jesus is a case in point.

David Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

What does "the husband is the head of the wife" (Ephesians 5:23) mean?

What does "the husband is the head of the wife" (Ephesians 5:23)" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 5:23) mean?

This statement occurs between two calls for the wife to be subject (verses 22 and 24). The reason for submission is her husband's headship. The pattern for this headship is also mentioned: "even as Christ is head of the church." The headship of Christ, as explained in Ephesians 1:20-23" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 1:20-23 and 4:16, involves authority and supply. The same is true here. A husband's headship involves authority. Since Christ is the pattern, this will preserve the relationship from becoming tyrannical. His authority over the church is matched by His affection. His control is coupled with care. Such should also apply in the human relationship. Also, as the physical head supplies the human body with direction and nourishment, so the husband in his role of head gives his wife provision, protection, and guidance.

D. Gilliland

Other pages in this section

About this site

When does the restoration of all things by Elias take place?

THE RESTORATION OF ALL THINGS

When does the restoration of all things by Elias take place?

The answer is given in Malachi 4:5" TARGET="_blank">Malachi 4:5: “Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.” The Lord seems clearly to refer to this promise, see Matthew 17:11" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 17:11 “Elias truly shall first come and restore all things.” As to what this coming represents we must refer to other Scriptures. The first time historically that Elias is mentioned in the N.T. is in Luke 1" TARGET="_blank">Luke 1: , in the angel’s message to Zacharias that his promised son “shall go before Him in the spirit and power of Elias to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, etc.” John’s mission was to resemble in spirit and power and result, the mission of Elias as described in Malachi 4:6." TARGET="_blank">Malachi 4:6. Now, we remember that when later the apostles James and John proposed to call down fire from heaven, even as Elias did, and consume the Samaritans, the Lord rebuked them on the ground that they knew not what spirit they were of. It was the spirit of Elias, which was perfectly right in his dispensation, but not that of the Son of man (see Luke 9. 54)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 9. 54).

Does not this supply one more Scriptural reason against the new theory that John, had he only been faithful, would have become one of the twelve apostles? Had he been so, there would have been two incompatible “spirits” in the twelve, one, that of Elias in the person of John the Baptist, and another foreign to it, the spirit of Christ. In Matthew 11:14," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 11:14, the Lord said, “If ye will receive it, this (i.e., John the Baptist) is Elias which was for to come.” The words, “if ye will receive it,” are important, as they also throw light on our Lord’s words in Matthew 17:12 “I say unto you that Elias is come already, and they knew him not.” This cannot, I submit, mean that John was a reincarnation of Elias. They are separate entities to-day. Elias will surely come again, but he will not be born, as John was, of a mother. He will come again as he went and probably as secretly, as far as the general world will be concerned.

John did up to a certain point fulfil the role of Elias. To use a modern phrase, he was his “double,” but none the less it remains true that “Elias will come before the great and dreadful day of the Lord,” and most evangelical interpreters of the Revelation are agreed that he will be one of the two witnesses of Rev. ii. Their ministry will last 1260 days or 3- years, that is, during the first half of Daniel’s last week of years, beginning with the Covenant between the Head of the Roman people and the Jews. The ministry of the two witnesses will be a ministry enforced by judgment and plague, and bearing down all opposition and. crushing their enemies by miraculous power. It will also be wonderful in its success. There will be a revival in Israel, such as has never yet been known, and a world-wide testimony through, I might suggest, the I,ooo equipped for this service by that Pentecost (see Joel 2" TARGET="_blank">Joel 2: ), of which that of Jerusalem was the foretaste, and vast numbers will be brought to repentance. It will only be when their ministry is finished that the “Beast,” then manifested as such, will slay them. This will inaugurate the day of Jacob’s trouble and the great tribulation, running concurrently, only to end in the appearing in power and great glory of the Son of man—”the great and terrible day of the Lord.”

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

What does an assembly lose when its sisters fall short of the involvement God intends for them?

What does an assembly lose when its sisters fall short of the involvement God intends for them?

Failing to properly enfranchise our sisters will have several deleterious effects. An assembly will lack warmth without the development of godly women. A generation of younger believers may be lost to the assembly because they have missed the gentle touch and advice of godly sisters. Women who view themselves as second-class Christians weaken the homes and the coming generation, their own children.

"In like manner" (1 Timothy 2:9)" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2:9) places the effective public prayers of the men (v. 8) beside the value of the modest godliness of the women (v. 9). An assembly cannot survive without effective prayer meetings or without godly sisters who adorn themselves with good works (v. 10). What an asset to testimony is lost when women fail to realize their value to the assembly!

Sisters’ failure to contribute to the assembly as the Lord intended hinders their spiritual development. All in the assembly suffer loss from this. In addition, sisters whose spiritual growth is stunted will likely rob the Lord of the glory He receives when headship is displayed as taught in 1 Cor. 11: 3-16." TARGET="_blank">1 Cor. 11: 3-16.

D. Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

Should a young person seek the counsel of parents and elders about dating?

Should a young person seek the counsel of parents and elders about dating?

In cultures where elders or parents do not arrange a couple’s marriage this is important. The influence of a society that discounts the permanence of marriage will test the strength of a Christian marriage. Finding the right partner is a crucial choice and must be made carefully, yet marriage is a life-long commitment of two who generally have no experience in making such a momentous choice.

How wonderful that Christians have a wise heavenly Father to guide them by means of prayer and His Word! It is never too early in Christian life for a believer to submissively ask the Lord if and whom he should marry (1Pe 5:7)." TARGET="_blank">1Pe 5:7). In addition, wise Solomon tells us twice that "In the multitude of counselors there is safety" (Pro 11:14; 24:6)." TARGET="_blank">Pro 11:14; 24:6). Parents and elders ought to be people a young person respects for their wisdom and experience. Friends who are both spiritual and objective are also good candidates for inclusion in the "multitude of counselors." The brother and the sister in Christ who begin to keep company are each responsible before the Lord to determine His will for them in this matter (Rom 14:12)." TARGET="_blank">Rom 14:12). They cannot make their choice merely on either the advice of respected counselors or the conviction of their "dating partner" that their relationship is the Lord’s will. The input of others, however, should be weighed carefully, prayerfully, and as objectively as possible. The choice to date is not an irreversible choice, but believers should not make that choice lightly. To be kind and fair to each other, they should choose to spend time together only if each one would consider the other to be a reasonable candidate for marriage. The insights of trusted counselors can be helpful in assessing the prospective partner’s spirituality, personality, capabilities, habits, reliability, family background, and overall compatibility.

Years before dating is an issue, parents and elders can cultivate a relationship with these believers that will foster trust and enable effective and helpful communication in this important area. Before their children are thinking about dating, parents can promote family discussions that will help their children recognize important features they should weigh when thinking of a relationship with prospective marriage partners.

D. Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

What is the hope in this life to which Paul refers in 1 Corinthians 15:19?

What is the hope in this life to which Paul refers in 1 Corinthians 15:19" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15:19?

What we hope for causes us to live as we do (Hebrews 11:1)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 11:1). In Romans 8," TARGET="_blank">Romans 8, we are assured that tribulation (vv. 35-39) cannot thwart God’s purpose to ultimately conform us to the image of His Son (vv. 29, 30). But in Romans 5," TARGET="_blank">Romans 5, tribulation works in the present to produce perseverance, character, and hope (vv. 3-4, NASB). What God will ultimately do, He does progres- sively making us more like His Son now. Our hope for the future gives us hope in the present.

This is true in 1 Corinthians 15," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15, too. Verses twelve through 34 emphasize the impact of the resurrection of Christ. It assures that believers will rise, Christ will reign, death will be defeated, and God will be all in all (vv. 26-28). Why then fear death? Hope for the future translates into living in the present. Therefore, Paul daily faced the possibility of a martyr’s death (vv. 30-32).

If believers are willing to hazard their lives for a hope that will die with them because it is ill-founded, "if Christ be not risen" (v. 14), they are miserably misguided and most to be pitied.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What is the meaning of BC and AD?

What is the meaning of BC and AD?

The terms B.C. and A.D. are the abbreviations for the years before the birth of Christ and the years since. It is erroneously thought that “A.D.” means “After Death”.

B.C. stands for “Before Christ” which is commonly known.

A.D. stands for “anno domini” or “The year of our Lord” in English. “After Death” would make no sense since Christ died at the age of 33. He therefore died in the year 33 A.D.

Although your study Bible might contain footnotes and references to specific years, the BC / AD system was not implemented until centuries after the birth of Christ. Most of the dates in the Bible are references to the number of years that a king reigned or when he died.

The year 0 B.C. is not believed to be accurate. There were errors made in calculating the dates on our Gregorian calendar that we use today. Most experts believe that Christ was born sometime between 6 B.C. and 4 B.C.

The Bible does not stress the importance of the year, nor the date on the calendar of the birth of Christ. What does divide history and indeed the whole human race is the work that Christ accomplished on the cross.

Hebrews 10:12" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

In more recent times, the scientific community has tried to do away with naming the years after Christ. The newer secular abbreviations for dividing history have been renamed to CE and BCE. Although the new terminology does not change any numbers of the years, it changes the names of the time periods before and after Christ.

CE stands for "Common Era” “Common” means that convention states we use the Christian dates to measure years.
BCE stands for "Before the common era."

Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu