Of Husbands and Wives by Elder Joseph R. Holder Preface When one mortal rubs shoulders against another, you will see either the best or the worst in them. And since marriage is the most intimate of human relationships, or at least should be so, we often see the best and the worst in that sphere of life. This work is presented from a deep conviction that we all need to rethink the Bible model of married life, to clarify the rules and expectations God established for a contented, happy marriage. Perhaps we could call this subject The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, for an examination of the marriages we see around us will reveal all three. While looking at some of the bad and the ugly, my intent is to reestablish in our minds the beautiful, the good image of marriage as God designed and ordained it, along with the God-given wisdom for building, and repairing, strong, healthy marriage relationships. What is the responsibility of religious journals and preachers in this area? Is it to teach only on the negative? Which divorce is justified and which is condemned? Or does it also include the teaching of positive, sound foundations upon which healthy fulfilling marriages are built? As I pondered this subject and the teachings of the Bible in this area of life, I became more aware than ever that the Bible has much more to say about building good marriages and healing strained ones, than it quite adequately says about divorce and remarriage. Should we not spend more of our time on prevention by establishing healthy balanced ideas in young minds about marriage, and building, or rebuilding, strong marriage bonds in those who are married?? It is ever so easy for relationships to slip away from the strong contented balance which God has wisely designed in scripture. That imbalance can take the form of a domineering man who heaps verbal and emotional abuse upon his wife, or it can appear as a shrewish woman who is never satisfied with anything which her husband does. However, most often the shift is more subtle and more difficult to define, but it nevertheless contributes to a nagging dissatisfaction with the way things are. Where is that balance of sweet reasonableness in the lifestyles of husbands and wives? While there is a Divine oneness in the marriage bond, the ground rules of a marriage must also preserve the individuality of both partners. Especially in this area, over-demanding husbands, complicated by the wife's responsibilities of child-rearing, threaten the woman's identity. Her individuality in the human race is essentially stripped from her, and she is made to think that God ordained it to be so! Such an imbalance is an abuse of the relationship which God sanctified and intended to be the most intimate and loving bond known among earthly creatures. Where in the Bible was Christ ever abusive, severe or disrespectful to his bride? The key verse in the entire Bible on the husband's responsibility is found in Ephesians 5:25, "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it." Christ's love for his church is not demonstrated by demands, denigrations, and abusive criticism. The verb, the word of action, which tells us how Christ showed his love for the church is gave! Don't forget that word, men! Your love for your wife is biblical only to the degree you give yourself, your respect, your love, and your tender friendship to your wife! After completing these writings, I was tempted to change the title to Of Husbands and Wives, Especially Husbands. By design and conviction these writings, while dealing with both husband and wife, will often emphasize the model conduct and responsibility of the husband. I truly believe that the excesses of the women's movement is more the result of abusive and irresponsible men than of rebellious women! If a man truly loves his wife as Christ loved the church, do you really think she will be unhappy and unfulfilled? No way! She will be the happiest soul on earth! The foundation for a Bible marriage, a fulfilling, enlarging, growing, loving marriage, is found in the model marriage of all time, the marriage relationship of Christ and his church. Is there ever a perfect marriage? No. Can hurting, troubled marriages improve? Yes, they certainly can in direct proportion to the extent the parties are willing to examine and adjust the priorities of their lives in conformity to the kind, practical teachings of the Bible on this subject. The one necessary ingredient in any hurting relationship is that both parties care enough to make a commitment to try to work out the problems. With that commitment as a foundation and the Bible model as their textbook, they can rebuild and rehabilitate the worst of situations. Is it easy? No. Will it happen overnight? No. But the resources are available in the truth, not those one-sided cliches which both men and women are prone to use. Perhaps these writings will make you take a second look at the Bible handbook of marriage, at the possibility that every relationship can be improved, enriched. Fundamental Christian living will work; love, forgiveness, respect, that Golden Rule kind of godliness. We take our Lord and his teachings too lightly to think that they only work in the sterile atmosphere of church and the assembly of saints. They really work in the hurting, cruel world where we live for the other six days of the week. When a dear friend, or spouse, hurts us, they work. When the unfairness of life closes in on us, they work. When everything seems impossible, they work. When the foundations of life's dearest dreams, even marriage, are threatened, they work! While holding the perfect model often before your eyes in this work, I realize that the real world in which we live is not so perfect. Therefore, I have included a liberal portion of observations which are designed to help get us through those rough times, to learn from them, and to forgive our mates and ourselves for less than perfect conduct. I offer hearty tribute to a mother whose godly example of faithfulness and love in her marriage set a high challenge for me to follow. I thank a wife who loved me and tolerated many years of double standard conduct out of me which now causes me grief and shame. Never have I felt so thankful and contented in my marriage as when I finally discovered that the noble lady God planted firmly beside me was my godly equal and my God-given partner, not my personal slave. Perhaps some who read these words can learn more about God's ideas of marriage and can build on that foundation without the necessity of repeating the mistakes of the past. "Jonah school" may be a well-attended school, but in God's class schedule of life, it is not on his list of mandatory attendance. We are graciously invited to sit at the feet of Jesus and learn life's most important lessons directly from him. May it be so with us in this most significant part of our lives.? Joseph R. Holder? Chapter 1? Introduction This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Ephesians 5:32.? One could make a strong Bible argument that God has made the family the cornerstone of society. As society respects and honors God's exemplary family, God blesses society, and as society repudiates God's family values, society becomes its own curse. Considering the clear rip in the present fabric of our society, we need to examine the Bible pattern of the family, the foundation of which is the husband-wife relationship, to correct our course. Perhaps God will grant us a renewed vision of a God-fearing productive culture by which to inspire the church of the next generation. The alarming divorce rate, the commonly accepted notion of living together without the benefit of marriage, the deep strain between men and women in the social and professional world, and the frightening perversion in the area of intimacy between men and women, all cry out for examination and prayerful consideration. This series will focus on the Bible model of marriage and the husband-wife relationship. If you see some thoughts which are a bit different; if your thinking is challenged to take another look at God's marriage laws, whether you agree altogether or not, I have accomplished a worthwhile purpose. While we may boast that the church is in, but not of, the world, we cannot deny that the church and its members are definitely affected by the world in which we live. The most comprehensive marriage manual to be found in print today, size notwithstanding, is the New Testament, Ephesians, Chapter 5.? The fact that God used his version of marriage as a symbol of eternal and spiritual truth should tell us that he considers the marriage relationship in a very special light. In few subjects as distinctly as in marriage do we face the clear truth that the Bible is altogether a contemporary, relevant book, full of valuable truth for the Christian of the Twentieth Century, or any other century. In the New Testament as the Jews considered the teachings of Jesus on this subject, they thought out loud that perhaps the moral responsibility of marriage was more than they were willing to accept.? His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. Matthew 19:10.? In many marriage ceremonies the very idea that the marriage vow is taken for life is now altered to legitimize the vacillating emotions of man's carnal nature. "So long as you both shall love," has replaced "So long as you both shall live." As traditional Jewish writings of the New Testament era document a casual irresponsible opinion of marriage, so our society has taken the same view. Divorce, then as now, was considered nothing more than a neutral eraser applied to the chalk board of life to eliminate a relationship which no longer held any desire or challenge to its participants. It was considered no more or less immoral than changing jobs or moving to a new city. Is there a moral issue related to the marriage vow? To divorce? To the maintenance of a legitimate attitude toward marriage? What is the biblical teaching on the relationship which should exist between a husband and a wife? Does the Bible say anything about polygamy? Infidelity? Divorce and remarriage? Many of these issues will be considered here, for the Bible has much to say about them all, and many more. What about the controversial issue of surrogate parenting, straight from today's headlines? Did you ever think about Sarah and Hagar? The controversy is no less divisive now than then. Is the wife just a "Pretty thing" to hang uselessly on her husband's arm, or has God established a clear-cut defined responsibility for the woman? Several centuries before Christ, a wise man named Solomon wrote of certain things which were too wonderful for him, things too mysterious to understand or explain. One of those things was "The way of a man with a maid." The beautiful beginnings of love should do more than simply live up to their expectations; they should exceed them wonderfully! Sadly, that is frequently the opposite of the more normal experience. Why? Could it be that the relationship which began freely and lovingly from the heart somehow ended in stereotypes of what people expected, instead of what God had graciously planted in the heart? How often, even in those marriages which survive, do we hear the parties confessing with sad dismay, "The honeymoon is over." Did God end it? Does he build you up for such a painful let down? Never! Then what happened? In this series we will certainly not cover all the possible detours which can bring a marriage to grief and a dead end, but as we examine the Bible example of marriage and the foundational truths of the relationship between husbands and wives, we may just find a nugget here and there to help restore the warm, fulfilling spirit of marriage which God breathed into it with his marvelous design and instruction. Yes, this is a great mystery. We cannot understand how two people can forsake their families who bore them, cleave to one another, and become one flesh. Can we grasp some portion of God's grace loving us when we were unlovely, sacrificing himself for us when we were undeserving, and caring for us until with loving kindness he drew us to his bosom and hid us from the storms of life, or carried us through them? Can we grasp that God loves us, not how or why, but is there some deeply imbedded conviction, however mysterious, that God really does love us? If we can take hold of this spiritual truth at all, then we have unearthed the bedrock, the Divine foundation, for God's style of marriage. May he renew that holy vision in our minds daily!? Chapter 2? The Theology of Marriage Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband. Ephesians 5:33.? Nevertheless; it's amazing how much we can learn from a simple utility word like this. In this passage it tells us that while the most important lesson is something else, the timely relationship of husbands and wives is not to be taken as unimportant or unnecessary. Before embarking on our study of husbands and wives, let's study the spiritual reality behind the lesson, the heavenly theme which was used to illustrate the husband-wife relationship. It will help us immensely as we are faced with a less than perfect world, a less than perfect husband or wife, and a less than perfect marriage relationship. In reality, since no mortal is perfect, no relationship, even the most successful marriage, is perfect. Therefore, this lesson will serve to instruct us richly in the reality of life's relationships, marriage included. Marital relationships begin with verse 22 of this chapter. We cannot read far into the lesson without being drawn to the conclusion that marriage is a spiritual relationship. The wife is compared with the church, which Christ loved, sanctified, and washed, the church which he will finally present to himself, a glorious church without spot, wrinkle, or blemish. The husband is compared with Christ, the faithful lover and saviour of the church. While the wife is taught to be in subjection to her husband, it is to be the kind of subjection we see in the church's subjection to Christ. It is a certain quality of subjection, not general slavery, for the church is not Christ's slave, but his beloved bride. The example he gives here is based on unconditional love. Equally, her subjection is to be in loving consideration for the miracle of love which he has bestowed upon her. The husband is not told to domineer over his wife, but to love her in the same way that Christ loved the church and gave himself for her. Men may be disappointed, but the specific command that the wife is to " Obey " her husband is conspicuously absent from scripture! Whatever subjection the husband may have reason or right to expect, his most significant responsibility is to love his wife with the same kind and quality of love which Christ had for his church. In our modern culture there is an underlying belief that anytime a spouse, husband or wife, crosses over a certain line of conduct, the offended partner is not only excused, but almost compelled to divorce the offender. The example of Christ and the church eliminates that notion altogether. What was the visible indicator that Christ loved the church? Was it not that he made provision to remove her spots, wrinkles, and blemishes? Modern theology may be more the villain in the corruption of marriage than Hollywood. Think of the popular theology of our day. It is clearly that, if you do not remove some of your spots, wrinkles, and blemishes, you cannot become a member of the family of God. You are told that God loves you, for he supposedly loves everybody, but you are also warned that that love is not forever. It is in danger of ceasing unless you respond to it. Are you not told that God is altogether justified in deciding to stop loving you, unless you respond to his overtures. Can you not see the fallacy of this doctrine? If God is justified in terminating his love for the sinner who does not correctly respond to his courtship (Have you ever heard a preacher speak of the "Wooing" of the Holy Spirit?), then a husband or wife who becomes displeased with a less than perfect partner is equally justified in breaking the marriage bond. What a disastrous theology! It violates the Bible's clear assertion that God's love is everlasting, specific, and unconditional! His model love removed the imperfections of his bride, rather than justifying his divorce of her! Because of severe abuse or other threatening issues, a marriage may necessarily have to be dissolved, but it should be noted that in such a case one of the partners deserted a responsible position in the marriage long before the dissolution. That irresponsible desertion of responsibility is what this lesson is aimed at preventing. We should never think that God is confused by the spider and the cobweb, the cause and the effect, of actions. This lesson aims directly at the cause of marital problems and is designed to interrupt the erring behavior before it destroys the marriage. Take note that the quality and kind of love which is here set forth as the foundation for a lasting, happy marriage is neither physical, nor emotional, but spiritual! Physical appearance changes with age, and so does the shallow love which is based on it. Emotions ride up and down the roller coaster of human cycles and circumstances, and so will the love which is based on them. The word translated love in this chapter, comes from the Greek word which defines love as a moral quality, not based on the beauty or behavior of the object loved, but based on the preciousness of the object in the heart of the lover, and endowed with a constant moral commitment to control and influence the attitude and conduct of the lover toward the object which is so loved. Physical attraction and emotions certainly will be present in a sound marriage, but this deeper love should be the foundation. Biblical morals don't change with time or circumstances. It is just as wrong to lie or steal when you are happy as it is when you are sad. And while we are thinking about God's "Big Ten," let's apply the relevant commandment to our lesson. It is just as wrong to commit adultery when you are mad at your spouse, as it is when you are madly in love with him or her. Moral conviction controls thoughts and behavior. The moral quality of love which is to be the basis of marriage also controls thoughts and behavior! God's love affair with his church will not end! Neither should ours with our marriage partner!? Chapter 3? Marriage, For Time or Eternity? Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Matthew 22:29, 30.? Especially when a couple is happily married, the idea that marriage carries over into heaven is quite romantic, but it is altogether unsupported by the Bible. The primary theological advocate of this idea in our age incorporates the notion into its larger theological scheme that those who succeed in this life will become gods in the next life, and their wives will be instrumental in populating the world over which they will rule as gods. Inherent in this theology is also the idea that the god-man will have more than one god-wife, not at all the elevated concept of an ideal marriage continued in heaven. It smacks too much like the words of God's adversary in Genesis 3:5, "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Jesus called the being who spoke these words a liar and the father of lies. I believe Jesus, don't you? As we study the Bible doctrine of marriage, we learn that God created woman and marriage for the earthly happiness and contentment of the man he created in the Garden of Eden. There is no Bible evidence, not one shred, to suggest that marriage survives the grave. In the greater context of this lesson we can learn much about life after death and the resurrection. Verse 23 reveals that the people who initiated this discussion did not believe in the resurrection; Mark and Luke enlarge and suggest that they neither believed in the angels. In a futile effort to embarrass Christ and prove to their constituents that he was a fraud, they challenged him with the question about a woman who had been married more than once in full compliance with the law. Then they sprang the trick question, "Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her." Trick philosophical questions are often a dead give-away that the person asking the question really doesn't believe God, so he must pose hard questions and philosophical knots to justify his unbelief. The Sadducees error is the error of all who desert the truth of God in all ages; they do not know or respect the scriptures or the power of God. Not a person living can explain or understand a power so great as to resurrect those who have been dead for centuries, but the child of God who has experienced the power of God and believes the Bible can, nevertheless, believe the doctrine of the resurrection. The Sadducee sect was more a political party than a religious order, not unlike those in some countries who are waging civil and political war with the establishment under the name of Christianity. Lest some might become anxious about the future state and their sense of fulfillment and contentment, which they relate so closely with marriage in this life, Jesus barely cracked the door of that heavenly world and gave those who challenged him, and us, a glimpse of something in heaven which is far better than any sense of contentment we are capable of enjoying on earth. "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." "As the angels," mysterious, but very real creatures who appear in the Bible as Divine messengers, always in harmony with God, always obeying his bidding, and always so fully absorbed in the very being of God, that we can hardly separate them in our minds from God himself. In Ephesians 3:15 Paul bowed his head in a prayer of thanksgiving to the Father, "Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named." It would not be biblical to deny that there is a family setting in heaven; it would only be wrong to assert that the heavenly family is no greater or better than the earthly. However rewarding your marriage on earth may have been, it cannot be compared with the heavenly family of God who will be your eternal companions and family in glory. The intimacy, the honesty, and the sense of deep comforting fulfillment which rise from a godly marriage on earth are simply prophetic of the greater sense of all those emotions, and more, in the world to come. In that family there will be no empty chairs, no visits to cemeteries, and no black sheep. All the family will be present and just as contented with that wondrous world as you will be, for all will admire the Father who is head of the family more than any other being who will be there. Proof of life after death and the resurrection is not reserved in scripture for deep or mysterious scriptures, but rather appears in the simplest of statements. To prove to his critics that the Old Testament taught this doctrine, Jesus selected one of the simplest verses in the entire Old Testament from Exodus 3, "But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." The entire argument Jesus used was built on one simple word and its present tense form, "Is." He made the point that if there is no life after death, then at death we do not exist and God is therefore no longer our God. But at a time when Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had been dead for many long years, the verse said, "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." While the bodies of these three men were buried in the grave, they were alive and well in the presence of their loving and holy God, and he was at that very moment their God. Therefore there is life after death and a resurrection of the dead. There may be no marriages in eternity, but all of the blessings which God put in this heavenly relationship, and countless more, will be enjoyed without measure in that glory world.? Chapter 4? The Assignment-Each According To His Order Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Ephesians 5:24. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. Ephesians 5:28.? While either of these two subjects would justify any entire series on their own merit, this lesson will simply establish a pattern, a way of looking at the subject. Throughout this series, Of Husbands and Wives, the issue of a God-defined position or function, in direct contrast to the superiority or inferiority of one sex over the other, will be repeated often. In my sincere view, both sexes have largely deserted the position which God assigned to them in favor of the opposite turf, frequently justifying a self-serving behavior with the idea that God made them superior to the opposite sex. First, consider the instructions to the wife in this lesson. The verse does not require that women become thoughtless slaves to their husbands, nor does it demand unqualified obedience. As a matter of fact, fellows, you should rethink the idea that God commands your wife to "Obey" you. Such a statement is not found anywhere in the Bible! Obedience usually suggests that the one who is commanded to obey another is inferior to the other party. The issue in the admonition to the wife in this verse is not obedience, but subjection. Subjection is more suggestive of an equal being assigned a particular function or position, and that position calls for subjection to the assignment or the person responsible for the assignment. Far from unqualified slavery or unthinking obedience, this verse imposes a strong, highly structured form and limit to the subjection which is taught. "As the church is subject unto Christ," is most instructive, for only as the church is subject to Christ should the wife be subject to her own husband. The basis of Christian obedience is not fear, threat of death or bodily harm, or emotional harassment, the method many husbands use to brow-beat their wives into submission to their whimsical ego, all the while reminding the wife that this is the way God intended it to be. The foundation of the church's subjection to Christ is based on its love for Christ, which in turn is based on Christ's unqualified love for the church. The driving force behind true subjection to Christ, is love for Christ, confidence in his faithfulness, and a trusting reliance on his judgement. Included in the word subject is the idea of subordination and reflexive obedience. This thought is forcefully presented in II Corinthians 5:14, "For the love of Christ constraineth us." The constraint of Christ is not fear of hell and punishment, but love. Oh, that more women had this attitude toward their husbands, and that more husbands deserved such an attitude! The verse which focuses on the husband's responsibility is equally instructive. What would you say is the single most important responsibility of the husband? To be the bread-winner? To remain faithful? These obligations are not under question, but they certainly are not inherently the foundation of a Bible marriage according to this verse. The husband's chief obligation to his wife is "To love their wives as their own bodies." Before you say that this is too simple and too easy, you should carefully examine the word love, for it speaks of far more than simple affection. While warm, tender affection is included in the scope of this word, it primarily carries a sense of moral and personal obligation. The broader sense of the verse adds to this moral and personal dimension, the element of degree, "As their own bodies." It is highly objectionable to me for a man to speak of his wife as "The old lady," for the inference in the title smacks of disrespect and disaffection. Often the same man who so speaks of his wife will pay large sums of money to the gym and invest many hours a week to keep his own body in prime shape. His body is the object of intense pride, for it is a part of him. Well, doesn't this verse give the wife the same position? Love of one's own body is far more comprehensive than simple pride in its physical appearance. It also considers a sense of self-respect, not unlike the verses which command that we "Love our neighbor as ourselves." One of the best fail-safe rules to maintain a healthy marriage relationship, one which is stable, fulfilling, and rewarded with joy and contentment, is a simple honoring of the Golden Rule in all aspects of the relationship. As strongly as I object to much of the Feminist's movement and the damage it is doomed to impose on the Bible integrity of the woman's assignment in marriage, I believe with equal conviction that the movement is a predictable reaction to the mass failure of men to honor their responsibility toward women, including very especially this responsibility of love. Often when a marriage in trouble is examined, each partner emotionally points the finger of blame at the other party, as if the failure of one partner fully justifies any course of convenient action by the injured partner. We need to move beyond the realm of what can be excused into the personal responsibility each partner in the marriage has before God. The failure of another never justifies my failure before God! To the extent of my knowledge of God's will, I am consciously responsible to perform it, regardless of anyone else's conduct. If husbands and wives thought first of the responsibility God has assigned personally to them and less about how their partner has failed, this image of a model marriage from Ephesians 5 would be a more common sight than it is. May it be so!? Chapter 5? The Original Order, Man Alone And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. Genesis 2:18. Every so often, you read about people trying to regain the paradise of Eden by various philosophies and life styles. But they never succeed. The flaming sword still keeps man from his illegal re-entry. We have two views of Eden from the outside, only two. First, we have the record of scripture which speaks of the most significant events of the Garden, and, second, we have the institution of marriage which God allowed man to take with him as he left the Garden. The origins of man, woman and marriage should be studied extensively. In this lesson we will study man alone in the Garden. A number of things are commonly mentioned as substitutes for marriage. Are they really? Yes, Jesus told us of those who chose to be eunuchs for the kingdom of God's sake, but that lesson and the Bible at large, suggests that such a state of life is indeed rare for man. More often than not, these substitutes are among the most common rationalizations for the breaking up of a marriage. Religion, ironic as it seems, is a frequent excuse for the dissolution of a marriage. For some few, religion is considered the basis for a life of celibacy, a life which I suspect is not as rewarding as it is purported to be, but for many others who married without understanding each other's religious convictions, it becomes a bone of contention. Religious intolerance does not stop in churches; it invades every arena of life, but it should not be so. The Genesis account of man's creation and his first days in the Garden of Eden reveal man in fellowship with his Maker. God and man communed on a daily basis, talked as old friends, and discussed the future of this new world together. There was no strain in the relationship, no struggle of one against the other. Yet after this truly spiritual experience, man was not complete. It was after this period of fellowship with God that our verse says that it was not good for man to dwell alone. Massive numbers of marriages are destroyed by careers. It is nothing less than alarming to consider the frequency with which a young couple, madly in love, get married, and the wife works to put the husband through college. Once he has graduated and becomes successful in his chosen career, suddenly that girl, who stood by him through the lean years and worked hard to pay the bills while he studied to become a professional, is no longer good enough for him. His carnal heart begins to look for a woman with more class and pizazz, a woman who is worthy in his mind of his new-found success. Little does he remember who made that success possible. As a natural creature, at least, man in the Garden was in tune with God and comfortable with the relationship. He joined God in naming all of the animals which had been created. Likely, much more than simply calling out names was involved in this process. In order to be named and categorized, each animal had to be described, studied and examined. Adam was the first and best biologist, for he had regular access to the Creator of the animals, not just to the animals. A research biologist might think that such an experience would be worth any sacrifice to obtain. Loss of a marriage partner would be truly a small price to pay for such an opportunity. But alone with his career and his God, Adam was still a lonely man. It was not good for man to dwell alone. No, career is not a justifiable excuse to destroy a marriage! It seems strange that many young married couples are always getting together with friends so often that they hardly have private time for each other. Frequently, they spend time separately with friends in otherwise harmless activities which were their prime entertainment before marriage. Are they uncomfortable with each other? Have they not learned how to relax and enjoy each other's companionship? It is altogether appropriate, in balance, for young people to develop a circle of friends, but these friends should never command so much of their time or energy as to invade the marriage relationship, much less compete with it. Adam had God for his best friend, and he certainly had plenty of things to do with God. But, nevertheless, we read that it was not good for man to dwell alone. Now consider the balance of all these things. Obviously, a religious schedule should be a part of every godly life, and nothing should compromise the conviction a man or woman have about their faith in God. A profession is a necessity to meet the financial demands of life, and there is nothing wrong with working hard to be good at what you do. Friends are a blessing from the Lord and should be treasured. "So what's the problem?" you ask. It's this. When these things are used as a substitute for marriage, or when they are used in excess to crowd out the emotional investment the couple are to make in assuring the success of their marriage, they become cheap imitations of something which God has put right under our noses, and they will never offer the inner peace and fulfillment which God designed for the marriage relationship. Nor should they become so dominant of our time as to rob the marriage relationship of its unique and blessed function. Long before the first divorce or the first marital infidelity occurred, God observed for us in the simplest of language that none of these things was adequate for man. With them all in hand and at man's full disposal, God said that it was not good for man to dwell alone. And I add, neither are these things good when they choke out the intimacy of the marriage bond. In God's order of marriage there is something more rewarding and fulfilling than any of these things without it. God's original order reveals that man alone without a unique companion in marriage is not a complete man. To that we can add nothing!? Chapter 6? The Original Order, An Help Meet And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. Genesis 2:18. The Bible record of origins is deeply insulted by the prevailing notion of man's origin. Man's course did not slowly evolve from inorganic slime, to mutated animals, to apes, to sub-human cave dwellers, to man. According to the Genesis account, man's beginnings were in the cradle of the Creator, his highest creation and his daily companion. This verse immediately follows a dense record of God parading every living thing before man and man giving each of them their names, likely including their identity in a very thorough, systematic form. There is no record of the amount of time which passed in the Garden of Eden, but it is obvious that the life of Adam and Eve in that earthly paradise was not spent lying around twiddling their thumbs. Fellowship with the Creator, unparalleled knowledge of the animal world and the physical creation, man had the potential for a perfect existence. Yet despite this Edenic state, he needed something more. God himself observed, "It is not good that the man should be alone." To find fulfillment, even in Eden, man needed something which was still missing from his perfect world. "I will make him an help meet for him." The two key words in this statement which will set the tone for the Bible's entire teaching on the God-inspired position the woman is to fill in the marriage are "Help" and "Meet." Help is translated from a Hebrew word which means an aid or helper, and that word traces its root to another word which means "To surround, protect, or aid," and is translated as either "Help" or "Succour" in the Old Testament. Obviously, the significance of this word does not call up images of a passive door mat. To surround, protect and aid is a vital function, one which requires wisdom, energy, and determination. An interesting question arises. From what did Adam need protection in the Garden? There was no animosity between him and the animals there. There were no other human beings to threaten his safety. And certainly at that time God was not yet offended by the rebellious sin, so he was altogether friendly with Adam. So we are left with one remaining option. Adam needed to be surrounded and protected from himself! How much more in our age does the man need to be protected from himself and his pride, his overgrown, destructive, egotistical, macho pride. The woman who fills her assignment from God will nurture her husband with confidence, love and respect, satisfying his needs as no other person on earth. She will surround and protect him from seeking his ego-satisfaction in unhealthy or ungodly ways by making him know that he is the most important thing in her life. And with that confidence he will beam with joy and satisfaction. A good friend who understands this truth once told me that he often hears men on the job talking about their "Old lady," a very offensive and demeaning way to talk about their wives. When the men reach the peak of their "Old lady" conversation, he speaks up and loudly says, "I think I'll go inside and call my beautiful bride." Perhaps they get the point. "Meet for him." The Hebrew word translated "Meet" is defined as a counterpart, mate. It suggests one who complements her husband, who draws out his best side and develops it by her presence and actions. Such is the God-defined position of honor which has been assigned to the wife. The God of the Bible has clearly defined the qualifications and activities which are reserved for the ministry and the deacons in his church. He has exemplified good governmental activities and responsibilities, good neighbors, good masters, good servants, good parents, and good children. It may not be a proper sin when someone in one of these assignments fails their position, but it is without doubt a failure to complete the assigned task which God has directed for that position. In Eden the woman's assignment was to surround and complete the man, almost to be his alter-ego. Perhaps the severity of her punishment related to her failure to complete that assignment. I sincerely believe that we would see more healthy, happy families if we adopted the idea of a divinely assigned position, rather than thinking of woman as altogether inferior to the man. Such language is more the language of God and his book than our present superior/inferior stereo-type language. Let me illustrate. If woman's assigned task is to surround and protect her man, then she is able to complete that task with more success than anyone else on earth. When a man attempts to fill that role with another man, we immediately recognize it as perversion and are repulsed by it. Therefore, we may rightly conclude that, in her designated function, the woman is as truly superior to the man as the man is in respect to his assignment. The last point to observe in this beautiful original order is that there was no animosity between man and woman. There was no bickering over whose responsibility a certain task was or whose fault a certain failure was. They accepted each other as complementary, divinely arranged and proportioned pieces of a puzzle, pieces which must fit together in a designed way to present the image and picture their Creator intended. There is a rule which Bible expositors honor highly. According to this rule, the first appearance of a certain symbol sets the interpretation of all future appearances of the symbol. If this be a valid rule of interpretation, then, my friends, we have a lot of serious Bible study to do in the matter of the husband/wife relationship. And rest assured that we will see happier marriages and marriage partners when this is done.? Chapter 7? Marriage, A Divine Institution Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Genesis 2:23, 24.? As surely as Eve was created by God, just so surely was marriage created by Him as well. While marriage partners are free to work out the integration of preferences and personalities within the marriage, we must respect the relationship which God has defined for marriage or suffer some form of loss in the relationship. In the one chapter marriage manual, Ephesians, Chapter 5, Paul drew extensively from this lesson, the record of the first marriage. "No man ever yet hated his own body." See the reference to the woman literally being taken from the man's body? How could he hate her? She was a part of him! In the comfortable setting of church or a quiet moment of Bible reading, it is easy to agree with the philosophical position of this lesson. But in the rag-tag world of imperfections, stresses and disappointments, it is so easy to justify any particular conduct which seems convenient for us at the moment. Friends, these words were written for the down-and-dirty trenches of life where we all live in a flawed, imperfect world, a world in which, frequently, those who hurt us most are those whom we love most. Hurt and disappointment must be dealt with, but they should not be allowed to justify equal error on the opposite side of the moral scale. While we will study divorce more directly later in this series, it is appropriate at this juncture to observe that when God institutes something, he gets it right the first time. This fundamental truth is often ignored in the traditional ideas of society about marriage. After all are we not reminded that Moses himself made specific provisions for divorce in the law? Our modern social perception of marriage and divorce chooses to politely remember Moses and to forget Christ, "The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. His disciples say unto him, "If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry." Matthew 19:3-10. I have quoted extensively from this passage, for it records the interpretation of the lesson by the Author himself and because it provides us with more instructive truth than we will ever find in any other quarter. Obviously, the Pharisees inferred an inconsistency between the Genesis account of marriage in the Garden and the provision of Moses in the law for divorce. Seizing this hotly debated issue, they hoped to catch him in a tangled web of reasoning which they could use against him. Knowing their hearts and the need his family would have for clear instruction on this common-to-life, emotion-charged issue, Jesus appealed to the simple original institution of marriage and quietly reminded them that the same institution still prevailed. God had not mysteriously changed the laws of marriage somewhere along the way. In yet another attempt to catch Jesus in error, a wonderful flaw of disagreeing with Moses, they questioned why Moses allowed divorce, but they were not prepared for his answer. The real problem was not the original institution of marriage, nor the permissive rule of divorce written by Moses, but it was the hardness of the human heart. Moses suffered divorce; he didn't encourage or sanction it! When the disciples comprehended that perhaps the original law of marriage and Moses really did agree, and that God intended for a marriage to last for a lifetime, they demonstrated the very hardness of heart which Jesus had exposed. Their reaction which concluded, "Then perhaps it isn't good to marry at all," revealed the true sin of their hearts. They were unwilling to consider the responsible assignment of a lifetime pledge to one marriage partner, God's intent for marriage. Life is full of choices and priorities, and most problems arise by a faulty ranking of the various priorities in our lives. I offer this sequence of priorities as the nearest to God's order that I have found. We should put God as our first priority, husband or wife second, children third, and profession fourth. If devotion to our marriage partner is second only to God and if we live out that priority, then we have just embarked on a way of thinking and living which would virtually eliminate broken homes from the Christian community. Just as thoroughly as one partner should leave father and mother, lowering them in the hierarchy of priorities, the other partner should reduce profession and career ambitions to their lower position in the priority list. "They shall be one flesh," is enlarged by Jesus in Matthew 19, "Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Contrary to the modern self-serving idea, marriage is not just a piece of paper. It is God's prescribed commandment for a man and a woman to live together with a commitment, second only to the commitment to God himself, to keep that relationship for life, to keep it joyfully, as keeping one's own self. In this kind of marriage God is honored, and the partners find more fulfillment and joy than can be imagined in any other relationship known to man.? Chapter 8? The Order Polluted by Sin, Woman's Curse Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Genesis 3:16.? One of the most intriguing dialogues in the Bible is God's interview with man, woman, and the serpent in Genesis 3. Before we search the lesson for relevant truth, we should document the difference between what God directed and what occurred as a result of the curse. God's order was for man to dress and keep the Garden and to enjoy the companion God gave him. That many things occur which are not of God is witnessed in scripture. The scriptures will clearly verify that God permits that which he does not cause or command; among them Jeremiah 7:31, 19:5, 32:35, along with I John 2:16 from the New Testament, "For all that is in the world....., is not of the Father, but is of the world." Of denotes cause or origin, and we are here told that all that is in the world, typified by three examples, is not of, caused by, the Father, but is of, caused by, the world. The idea that man can be as wicked as he pleases and justify himself by simply blaming God is preposterous! It is necessary to note this distinction, for many quote the curse as the basis for their blatant disrespect of the woman in marriage or in any other position, except abject servitude. God's order remains for the woman to be exactly what he created her to be, "An help meet for" the man. But because of sin and the wonderful tendency of human nature to eagerly blame anyone or anything rather than take the responsibility for one's actions, the woman will be made the disrespected example of contempt and irreverence by men as long as the world stands. No feminist movement nor constitutional amendment will ever change the basic tendency of human nature to blame anyone or anything else. That the woman was told that her sorrow and conceptions would be multiplied is as truly a consequence of the sin, the natural results of the fall and the curse, as that the man was told that he would fight the elements and the weeds to bring fruit forth from the ground. But the consequence and the penalty must be distinguished. The penalty did not change any more than the Divine purpose for the man and the woman. God imposed the ordained penalty, death; in Genesis 3 he simply informed man and woman what to expect in a corrupted world which had fallen under the curse which they had caused by their sin. Perhaps the unbalanced perception with which people look at their roles or the roles of their marriage partners is more the direct product of that horrid act of original rebellion against God than we are comfortable to admit. It is easy to talk of impersonal sin, of the doctrine of sin, or of a sinful disposition which is inherent in human nature. But when we single out a particular action, one which we are admittedly guilty of practicing, the sin becomes personal, and we become very uncomfortable with the idea. But the reality of that act of sin in the Garden first brought a Divine curse upon the participants and their offspring. Then it brought with it a continuous flow of secondary consequences, personal, direct conduct in each of us which reflects and verifies our participation in the horrors of a rebellious, God-rejecting character. In this present state of Adam's offspring where emotions and carnal tendencies comfortably violate the Divine order, man will go to great lengths to defy any personal challenge, even from God and his laws. He will speak of sin in the third person with great boldness, but he shirks in fear, deep disruptive fear, at any attempt to personalize that sin in self. To admit that our attitude toward members of the opposite sex, especially our own wife, has been perverted and flawed by something so deep and fundamental to our temperament as this is frightening beyond acceptance. We have been so indoctrinated into believing that man is the "Controller of his own destiny," that to be confronted with a specific and rather emotional example of the opposite truth just cannot be tolerated! To comprehend the role the woman should fulfill in the marriage relationship, we should not attempt to model the predictions of sorrow and grief recorded in God's description of the unfriendly world Adam and Eve faced after their sin. We should continue to look at the original design of the woman and expect her to be the appropriate helper, the only person God ever designed uniquely for that position, not in any way inferior or second rate in relationship to the man and the position God assigned to him. Marriages would be much healthier if the partners gave reverent consideration to the God-assigned functions for the husband and the wife, sincerely honoring each other as being exactly what God ordained. How can anyone be inferior when they obey God? And how can those of us who grew up at the feet of God-fearing, wise, moral, and loving mothers look ourselves in the mirror of conscience and have the brass to say that she was just one of those poor inferior women? Doesn't that seem like a rather transparent ego trip? Such a strong, beautiful model of godliness who so intelligently and lovingly raised us was, after all, truly made of weaker clay, and was really less worthy before God and society than we men? Sorry, folks! Such teaching is not to be justified by Bible example. In the realm of spiritual conduct we can readily accept that the laws of God run contrary to the carnal nature and that the work of the Christian is to develop those spiritual traits which harmonize with God and are in conflict with the carnal nature. Now, in the realm of the marriage relationship we should begin to cultivate the same disciplines and respect that partner as our "Heir together of the grace of life," a direct quotation from the Bible. Chapter 9? The Order Polluted by Sin, Man's Curse And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. Genesis 3:17-19.? Do you ever feel caught in a "Vicious cycle?" Think of the cycle in which Adam was caught, the ultimate cycle of human corruption! It starts with dust, and it ends with dust. The cycle must have seemed even more futile, since Adam had spent his entire existence up to this time in personal companionship with God, in joint ventures with God, naming and classifying every living creature and in surveying the beauty of the Garden, his familiar home. Adam was the only man in human history who lived without sin in either his person or his environment. He knew, Christ excepted, as no other man who ever lived, the meaning of full harmony with God. Up to this time he had lived in perfect oneness with his Creator and with the creation. But by a foolish and inexcusable act, he introduced discord and division into that perfect world. Although he tried, he soon discovered that there was no hiding from God. That flimsy fig leaf was no covering; he must now stand face to face with his Maker and hear the consequences of what he had done. It is altogether fitting that this lesson be considered in our study of husbands and wives, for it warns us that we should not listen to any, even the wife whom God gave us, whose words discord with the message which comes from God. It warns that all who ignore the course of life which God has directed are subjected to the cycle of dust. They start in dust, and they shall end in dust. But the cycle is somewhat more complex. In the meantime they are plagued by the weeds which grow out of dust, they are forced to sweat over an uncooperative plot of dust to obtain their food, and they live with a body of dust which is never willingly submissive to the will of God. They are cursed by dust from the womb to the tomb.? It is not conceivable to determine the precise agenda which motivated Adam to follow Eve in the transgression, and we are best advised to avoid endless speculation about the matter. But we can safely conclude that Adam traded God's agenda for his own, whatever it was. We can also assume that Adam decided to transform the position of the woman from an "Help meet" for him, to a prominence more influential to him than God had been, for God said, "Don't eat," and the woman said, "Eat." What did Adam do? Who did he heed? It seems that often when we elevate something to the level of being competitive with God, that the very thing which we exalt becomes most despised to us. "Cursed is the ground for thy sake," is first in the order of appearances of the curses which fell upon man, and it is attributed directly to the fact that Adam listened to Eve and not to God. "Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife," this is the absolute kernel of man's sin, of his rebellion against God. Therefore, it is fitting justice that the greatest thorn in his side should relate to the very woman who led him away from his Creator and God. The greatest conflicts ever experienced are not on the battlefields of national war, but on the battlefields of private homes where husband and wife forget the order of marriage which God set forth, and become lost in the fruitless struggle for harmony and meaning without submitting to the God of peace and harmony. It is not a battle of blood and bone, but of spirit and soul. It is not a war of weapons and physical strategies, but of minds and emotions, draining the strength of the soul. As for the woman, so for the man, the model relationship which God ordained between husbands and wives is not to be found in the cursed soil of the fall, but in the original order which God instituted when he made the woman and gave her to the man, "An help meet for him." Lest someone might conclude that the position of "Help meet" is necessarily inferior, I first observe that this relationship was established prior to the entrance of sin; it was God's description of the woman's relationship to the man. Secondly, I observe that the role of servant is often used in scripture to define the most productive and prominent positions. The words deacon and minister in the New Testament are translated from a Greek word denoting a table servant. The reality of the matter is that when anyone, regardless of their sex or position, truly do what God designed for them to do, they should not be looked upon as inferior in any way. They should be honored for following the example God gave them. And, finally, we should always remember that the only peace and productive order we shall ever know, in marriage or in any other pursuit, will be experienced in direct proportion to the degree to which we conform our thinking and conduct to the model of conduct which God has ordained in his Book, the Bible. Society will not outgrow this wisdom, culture will not eliminate it. God was true in the beginning, and God is true today! Look away from the curse to the order which God instituted when he took Adam's rib, the part of his anatomy nearest to his heart, and made the woman, taking her from man and giving her back to man, the Divine "Help meet" for him. That model from God is the subject of our study. We have much to learn!? Chapter 10? Monogamy, God's Order Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Genesis 2:24.? Periodically, the question arises, "How many wives can a man have with God's blessing?" Especially when the person asking the question is interested in expanding the number of partners he or she has, they will raise the matter that the patriarches of the Old Testament had multiple wives. What about it? Does the moral code of the Bible allow polygamy, the having of more than one husband or wife? It seems uncanny at times that God knew exactly how human nature would think, so he strategically placed simple, but very effective roadblocks along the way of man's creatively evil imagination. It should be no surprise to see men using God to justify their sin. After all, Adam did just that as soon as God questioned him about eating the forbidden fruit, "And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat," Genesis 3:12. This is the same Satanic spirit we see in modern music lyrics, that is when you can hear what they are saying over the horrid noise; for example, "It can't be wrong if it feels so right." Are human emotions the final word on morality? First to the matter of the patriarchs. Yes, they had many wives, but there is not a word in the Bible to justify that conduct, and nowhere in the New Testament do we read of them being commended for this practice. The multiple wives of Abraham are not mentioned as fruits of his heroic faith in Romans or Hebrews! The fact that an Old Testament patriarch did something is not moral justification for it at any time. Do we justify murder and broken marriages because of David and Bathsheba? Do we justify incest because of Lot's daughters? God forbid! Then why do we hear the idea that multiple marriages are morally justified because someone did it in the Old Testament? Someone asks, "Well, if it was wrong, why didn't God condemn it?" And I answer that he did condemn it. Have you read his ten commandments? Did you notice that one of the commandments mentioned adultery and another mentioned coveting your neighbor's wife? Can there be any doubt about God's moral position on the issue? Those two laws alone should settle the matter! However, there was apparently a spirit in the religious professors of Christ's day which was anxious to justify divorce and remarriage "For any cause." In Matthew 19 Jesus inserted in his Bible a record which for ever destroys the self-serving justification for divorce and remarriage. We are given in these verses a dynamic exposition, controlled by the Lord himself and aimed as precisely at the moral corruption of the Twentieth Century as it was at human sin in his day. "The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry," Matthew 19:3-10. A thorough examination of this lesson is quite revealing. These men who were supposed to believe in the integrity of God's writings raised what they thought to be a contradiction in the Bible, always a dangerous action and frequently a calculated justification for personal sin. Do you suppose that some of these fellows had divorced their wives and remarried or were thinking of doing so? They tried to inject a contradiction between the text from Genesis 2 and the law of Moses, Deuteronomy 24, perhaps suggesting that God changed his mind about morality. Does that sound familiar? However, Jesus promptly and convincingly persuaded them that there was no real conflict. Moses tolerated divorce because of the hard-hearted Israelites, not because God modified his moral code. Then Jesus set forth a very simple, straightforward principle of marriage, according to the original law God gave, one man and one woman, living together as husband and wife, one flesh, for the duration of their lives. Strangely, even after these understandable words from Jesus, the disciples, not the Pharisees, revealed some hardness in their own hearts, "If the case . . . be so . . ., it is not good to marry." Rather simply interpreted, their idea was that if they were so solemnly bound to their wife, perhaps they should not assume such a serious, lifelong obligation at all. They were suggesting that it would be better not to marry, than to marry and divorce, a quote straight from the modernists who say, "Marriage is only a piece of paper. Why not just live together as long as we want and then go our separate way?" Let the record stand clear that this reaction was not a responsive agreement with the words of Christ, but a complaining and irresponsible rejection of his words! What was Jesus' teaching on the subject of marriage in this lesson? Is it not obvious that he taught that the original law of marriage, one man and one woman join in marriage for life, recognizing that God has joined them together permanently as husband and wife?? Chapter 11? Living Together Without Marriage Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly. The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. John 4:16-19.? This Samaritan woman's surprise at the Lord's knowledge of her life is great! The Lord's revelation of her checkered past stripped her of all pretense, and she just blurted out, "Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet!" Then she ran into the village and told her neighbors, "Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?" John 4:29. Only the Messiah, the Christ, could penetrate the deep recesses of this woman's past, perhaps hidden from her neighbors, but not hidden from God. There was no doubt in her mind that she had confronted the Messiah. Since we live in a social era which boasts itself of liberal, non-judgmental morals, including a frequent defense of this woman's life-style, our lesson is as relevant as this morning's headlines, and much more honest. Take a look at contemporary situational ethics--a nice way of describing no ethics. We are told in talk shows, women's magazines, and in just about every other form of mass communications, that it is wise for people to live together to see if they are really compatible, that marriage is little more than the formal trappings of an outdated Victorian morality which offers no beneficial contribution to modern man. You've heard it all before. The real issue is this. Is there a solid, black and white morality? Are some things basically wrong, regardless of the situation? For those of us who believe in God and the integrity of his Bible, the answer is, "Yes, there is a foundational morality which is the basis for constructive society, and when that basis is deserted, the benefit of society to the man or woman of God vanishes." There is another danger we need to confront within the minds of many Christians who are sincerely distressed by this situation. They consider the pressures which a corrupt society can put on its individual citizens, especially the young, and cry out, "To expect Bible morality to be enforced and honored is not realistic. You've got to bend." It may not be realistic, but if that code is not restored to the foundations of our society, we will most certainly live in a very different, and much worse, society in the very near future. We must respect the foundation or prepare to lose the whole structure which is built on the foundation. Which is it, folks? Whether or not anyone listens, it is the obligation of every God-fearing Christian man, woman, boy, and girl, to commit their lives and reputations to the example of Christian morality which they respect. We can do that. We must do it! Think about this conversation, almost two thousand years old and yet as relevant as if it occurred yesterday. Marriage had been disrespected; this woman, married and divorced five times, had decided that it was "Right for her" to simply live with man Number 6 without the benefit of a formal marriage. She probably could justify it to her own mind with such trivia as, "This way, when we separate, I won't have to pay all those lawyer bills and suffer the embarrassing inconvenience of the legal process." Or, "Marriage is just a piece of paper; it means nothing. Why bother?" To re-discover our moral landmarks and keep our spiritual sense of direction, why not go right back to one of the most basic points of Bible morality. The basic meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words which appear as adultery or fornication, to say nothing of the definition of the English words, should settle the matter for those who respect the Bible. Remember, one of God's "Top Ten" is "Thou shalt not commit adultery." One would think that if God said, "Thou shalt not," the matter should be settled, but it seldom is. There is more than circumstantial evidence here that God has offered his personal moral judgement that sex outside of marriage or between unmarried couples is contrary to the relationship he established in his social order and moral code. While the concept will perhaps be developed more on another occasion, I quickly note that there is nothing in the Bible to support the idea that adultery is a state, and fornication is an act. In the commandment quoted above the word commit is used in reference to adultery. Both actions are acts committed against God's moral code and model social order. While women's equality may have focused attention on unjustified work-place discrimination, it has also pushed with alarming success toward the idea that women have the same rights of immorality as men. Sexual behavior polls clearly indicate that women are becoming more openly promiscuous than they were in the past. They have won their equality, but they crawled in the gutter to be equal with men on this count! They could have better demanded that men rise to their previous higher level of fidelity and morality. Remember God's original purpose for creating woman, to be "An help meet" for the man. Consider the final chapter in the life of the most notoriously "Liberated" man in the Old Testament, Solomon. After experiencing the futility, the empty ache, of moral abandon which was reflected in his thousand women, he climbed out of his moral abyss and made one last effort to help others escape the trap which had snared him, an effort entitled "Ecclesiastes." "Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity . . ., for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun." Ecclesiastes 9:9. No one could say it better!? Chapter 12? Divorce and Remarriage And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. Luke 16:17, 18.? Are there some parts of God's moral code which you would like to eliminate? These two verses seem at first unrelated, and both of them seem to be forced into the context where they appear. However, God orchestrated his Bible exactly as he wished, and these words, context and all, are his. A Jewish religious writer of the First Century is quoted in John Gill's commentary on the subject of stoning for adultery. After observing that the practice had ceased, he observed that if it were practiced, Jerusalem would have been emptied of stones before it were emptied of adulterers. The tempter's question posed to Christ in Matthew 19:3, "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" is quite instructive. Many Jewish writings record procedures which allow a man to divorce his wife for burning bread or for other such trivial matters. A number of scriptures appear in the Bible account of Christ's time on earth which leaves little doubt that marriage was not honored in the way God intended. An irresponsible view of marriage is not original to the Twentieth Century, popular as it is in our time. The primary design of this series is to focus our thoughts on preventive morality, how to prevent the wounds and scars of divorce, not simply how to patch up the agony after the damage is done. If God said that he hated divorce, Malachi 2:14-16, so should we. God-fearing people who have been through divorce will agree with God; they hate it, too. Spending inordinate time and mental gymnastics on the morality of divorce and remarriage begs the question of how to prevent the agony of divorce in the first place. No, we cannot perfectly do that as long as there are men and women who purpose to forsake their God-given responsibility, but perhaps we can return the emphasis to the value of that responsibility and prevent the actions which so often cause divorce. If these articles prevented just one divorce, they would be worth their weight in gold. At no time in history is there a greater need to rediscover God's pattern for marriage than today. The moral issue of divorce and remarriage is often muddled with hair-splitting technical interpretations in an altogether honorable desire to relieve the innocent victims of divorce from the cloud which settles over the typical scene of a dissolving marriage. The verses quoted above are considered too simplistic to deal with the complete issue. There must be exceptions and justified waivers of this rule. May I kindly offer that the Bible is quite fair in its handling of the innocent victim in a cruel divorce, if we will allow it to speak in the simplicity which is so characteristic of God and his Bible. Simply stated without detractive, hair-splitting interpretations, this lesson teaches that divorce and remarriage constitutes adultery. Period! It also infers that many of God's own people would just as soon see the jot and tittle of the law which teaches on divorce and remarriage fail. Let God speak and let man listen! The original law of marriage, established in Eden, remains God's foundational truth on this issue. "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh," Genesis 2:24. According to Christ, violation of that simple, basic concept is adultery, and adultery violates God's moral code. If we follow biblical teaching, we will look for reasons to preserve shaky marriages, not seek excuses to dissolve them. No marriage can be preserved against the desire and will of both of the partners. One partner, acting alone, cannot single-handedly preserve the marriage when the other partner is determined to end it. To see people we love involved is such problems is deeply painful; to experience it must be infinitely more painful. The moral code of the Bible on the sanctity and life-long commitment of marriage is God's prescribed deterrent to this pain in the life of his people. The utopian appearance of marriage in the movies may mislead the partners in some very workable, but less than perfect, marriages into thinking that they are missing out on a "Real marriage" without problems or rocky moments. For others the siren song of the tempter or temptress to escape the boredom of a steady, always there, predictable partner allures the simple-minded into the trap which Solomon experienced. There is this itching, nagging idea in the minds of so many that it is altogether right and good to experience, first hand, all the varieties and flavors of life, that such depth of experience will instil wisdom and contentment. Can we so soon forget that God gave Solomon wisdom and contentment unrequested when Solomon asked for wisdom to rule the nation wisely? Can we forget the frightening lesson of Ecclesiastes, that when Solomon became blind to that gift of God and attempted to personally experience all that was "Under the sun," he cried out, "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity and vexation of spirit!" It didn't work for Solomon, and, dear, dear friend, it will not work for us either! God's moral law is not a cold cage to rob us of fulfilling experiences. It is a loving bridle to lead us to a warm, contented life-style. It makes us the kind of person others, especially that marriage partner who is so close to us, can depend on without fear and doubt. Nothing is more deepening and fulfilling than doing what God teaches us to do! Nothing! Chapter 13? Adultery, Cause and Responsibility It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. Matthew 5:31, 32.? Frequently, the Bible presents divorce as if initiated by the husband. It is fascinating that, two thousand years later, statistics suggest that the husband is the most frequent transgressor of the marriage vow. While both partners often lose interest in perpetuating the marriage, somewhere in the process of dissolution, there was a time when one of the two took the initiative and led the way in the demolition of the relationship. Of course, it is not always the man, but it is noteworthy that after so many centuries, the man is still leading the charge in this moral demolition derby. No-fault divorce laws tend to obscure the actual dynamics which caused the divorce, so we need not look to court records for incisive answers. Male theologians tend to illustrate the cause of divorce with examples of an unfaithful wife, but God illustrates the truth as it most often occurs. God is fascinating! How can anyone read the Bible perceptively and think of it as boring? Luke 16 and Matthew 19 treat on the morality of divorce and remarriage. This lesson deals with another dimension of the ship-wrecked marriage, the cause. If we expect to improve the number of successful marriages, we must consider what God says about marital failure and liability for the pain and wrongs precipitated by a broken marriage. Clearly, the Lord attacked the divorce-for-any-cause mentality of his day. With unmistakable clarity he put the spotlight on the man who deserted his wife, contrasting the corrupted interpretation with the truth of God's moral code. In the First Century a single adult woman, especially one with children, must have found survival nearly impossible. Consequently, most divorced women married again, a matter of practical survival. Perhaps many men looked with some disdain on these women of second marriages as careless adulterers. Underlying their thinking appeared to be the idea that a man had the right to divorce his wife at will by simply giving her a bill of divorcement, but the wife had no such rights. The one exception for fornication seems to relate to the Old Testament provision for an effective annulment at the inception of the marriage, Deuteronomy 22:13-21, more naturally than to infidelity later in the marriage. Once a husband and wife accepted each other as husband and wife, their marriage was accepted with God, "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder," Matthew 19:6. Where did true responsibility fall when the marriage was later dissolved? According to the prevailing notion of the day, it was on the wife for burning the bread, not seasoning with the right flavors, or similar crimes. That remarriage constitutes adultery in the light of God's essential law is not challenged here. The issue is responsibility and cause! The simple grammar of the lesson says that the man who indiscriminately and irresponsibly divorces his wife causes her to commit adultery. The word translated causeth is defined by Strong as to "Make or do (in a very wide application, more or less direct)." This means that the man is directly responsible; he made her commit adultery! He must bear the moral guilt for her violation! The ethical morality established here is most often applied to the man who forsakes his wife and the marriage. Whatever she does out of circumstance to preserve her life, and that of her children, he is marked as the responsible cause. The same precept could apply to the wife who forsakes her husband and small children. God never justifies double standard morality! This lesson offers legitimate consolation to the innocent victims in divorce. The partner who abandoned the relationship is held accountable by God for the dissolution of the marriage and the subsequent misfortune of the divorced mate. How reasonable and entirely just God shows himself to be in this lesson. Game-playing and finger-pointing mean nothing to him. He knows what happened, and he holds the truly responsible person accountable for the resultant sin. This is no strange tenet to Bible teaching which presents a consistent pattern of accountability. The offending party is responsible for the out-croppings of his offense. This lesson simply applies that same equitable truth to the often twisted, tangled web of emotions which commonly accompany a divorce. It wades through finger-pointing and empty facades which blame the other party for the problem, however insignificant the other party's behavior. Without exception, God knows who is responsible for a broken marriage, and he imposes suitable responsibility on that party. The emotions which are stirred by divorce have been compared with the emotions of those who lose a loved-one in an untimely death. Depression and anger of major proportions occur in both circumstances before acceptance and reconstruction can take place. It is not likely that clear blame can, or should, always be placed by mere mortals in such an emotional and private matter as divorce. But it is important to understand that God knows, equitably and fairly imposing the guilt of the divorce where it belongs. Most victims of unjustified divorce are flooded with guilt and illogical self-blame, often to the extent that the experience of divorce destroys their functional activity in the church. Conceivably, a better appreciation of both the moral significance of marriage and the fair, insightful reality of God's ability to hold the liable party to the divorce accountable would help these victims to recover their lives and their faith.? Chapter 14? In God's Pattern, The Right Foundation And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her. Genesis 29:20. A basic premise of construction is that the building, regardless of its appearance, is no better than the foundation upon which it is built, a proposition which holds true in the moral and the spiritual aspects of life as surely as in the world of buildings. It certainly holds in the building of a marriage. Cliches are great mirrors of our thinking. Initiate a conversation about a lasting marriage, and the quips and cliches flow freely. "A good marriage is made in heaven." Then the distant reply is heard, "They may be made in heaven, but they are preserved in the kitchen." "The secret of my long happy marriage is _______." How many ideas have you heard in that blank? A few years ago when our children were involved in Girl Scouts, there was a large number of parents who all seemed quite dedicated to their children and their families. Recently, my wife observed that we were the only couple still married of that whole troop. At times our girls almost felt different from their friends because their parents were the only ones in the crowd who were still married. I offer these thoughts, not to boast, but to lament the sad state of our society when such a devastating experience as divorce is so commonplace. Television shows depicting marriage ceremonies cast the minister as requiring faithfulness to the vows "So long as you both shall love," not the traditional and biblical "So long as you both shall live." One of the key ingredients in the model of a successful marriage in the Bible has become a four letter word today; that factor is commitment. It's a dull word, a bit boring, certainly nothing to strive for in this exciting age of diversity and adventure. The depth of our cultural perversion is clearly unmasked when society's morals improve from fear of AIDS more than out of respect for moral integrity. About the only concept of love which is commonly known in this enlightened generation is that soft, gushy, gooey, kind of love which is solidly based on the fickle emotions of the carnal human nature. One day it is irresistible, demanding that the object be embraced and loved with abandon. The next day that same object is viewed with dedicated indifference, as just another casual acquaintance. Emotional love, carnal love, I don't know what to call it, but it is certainly not the foundation for a good marriage. Look at the kind of love which appears in our study verse. "They seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her." How much time did Jacob work for Rachel? A month? Six months? Not a year? The answer is seven years. What kind of love drives a man to work with joy for seven whole years to have that wonderful thing which wakes him up every morning with a smile, which drives him to work hard, long hours with faithful dedication, and to think of seven whole years as but a few days? Friends, it takes something with solid unshaking substance to drive a man to work for seven years and think of them as just a few days for the love of that woman. Jacob was not always the sparkling example of commitment and faithfulness, but this chapter of his life illustrates a love for Rachel which is a worthy role model for young couples considering marriage. Perhaps it offers some notable wisdom for a good foundation. During that seven years, he had time to see his Rachel in her best appearance and behavior, but he also saw her at her worst. He had time to talk with her about life, about managing a family budget, about children, about religion, and just about everything else. How many young couples get married without a single discussion of these issues, matters which will be the daily reality of their life as husband and wife? After all, they're too much in love to bother with such trivial things. Well, just wait. When the echo of wedding bells has vanished and they are confronted with the reality of an overdrawn bank account, the bank will see to it that they have a discussion of family finances and budgets. When the first child is born, there will be some real concern about how to raise it, what moral values are important to teach it, what religious teachings. If they didn't have a discussion of religion before, they will likely have one then. Interestingly, many of those who practice living together outside of marriage justify their practice by saying that they are really just getting to know each other to see if they would be happily married to each other. I recently heard of a couple who had lived together for ten years and finally decided to get married. One of the partners said a few months after the wedding, "Well, it didn't work. That man I'm married to now is not the same man I lived with for ten years." Enough said! Honest discussions of such matters during courtship would accomplish several very important things. First, it would revamp the whole concept of dating, long overdue, for the accepted dating activities are deeply involved in recreational activities, most often prohibiting any direct conversation, much less intense and honest dialogue. Secondly, they would learn early in the courtship if any foundation for a good marriage existed, or, for that matter, if there was any desire to get married after learning the true person. Seven years of communication didn't diminish Jacob's love for Rachel in the least. Was his Rachel worth seven years of hard work? Was it worth all the raw deals his future father-in-law pulled on him? Just remember that this commentary occurred after the seven years, not before them. After it was all over, the seven years were still well worth it