The Mark of Discipleship

Jesus said in John 13:34, 35, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.”

As a result of studying this verse, I have come to take the unity of the brethren very seriously.  This command was given by Christ Himself, and I find it tragic that this message is all but passed over in the church.  The church couldn’t be in a sadder state of affairs: the one trait by which Christians are to be known is the trait hardest to find among its members for their brethren.

“You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere men?” 1 Corinthians 3:3

This is not to say that we should disregard good doctrine, because you can show unity and love while still holding fast to the teaching of the Word.

“What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus.” 2 Timothy 1:13

If we want to be true followers of Christ and wish to be a part of His blameless and spotless church, then we it is imperative that we follow this dictate that He has given to us.  Let us heed Christ’s words and not be divided by minor disputes, minor points of doctrine, or denominational affiliation, but let us be unified in our love for Christ!

“Let brotherly love continue.” Hebrews 13:1

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

Its History

On Nov. 20, 1989, the U.N. adopted the CRC and submitted it for ratification to the member nations. It has been ratified by 193 nations—the United States is one of the few countries that has not ratified it.

The ratification process requires a two-thirds vote by the U.S. Senate. On Feb. 16, 1995, Madeleine Albright, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., signed the CRC on behalf of the United States. The CRC, however, has never been sent to the Senate for ratification because there is insufficient support to pass it.

Due to the recent election, however, there are rumblings from Capitol Hill that there will be an effort to seek ratification of the CRC during the next congressional cycle. Hillary Rodham Clinton is a strong supporter of the treaty, and as secretary of state, would have direct control over the submission of treaties to the Senate.

Its Impact

Why should passage of the CRC be of concern? It likely would have a negative impact on domestic law and practice in the United States. Article VI of our Constitution makes treaties—and remember, conventions are viewed as treaties—“the supreme law of the land.” The CRC would be treated as superior to laws in every state regarding the parent-child relationship. This would include issues regarding education, health care, family discipline, the child’s role in family decision-making, and a host of other subjects.

Article 43 of the CRC establishes an international committee on the rights of the child to examine compliance by member nations. This committee, which sits in Geneva, has final authority concerning interpretation of the language contained in the CRC.

Two central principles of the CRC clearly are contrary to current U.S. laws related to parent-child relationships. The CRC provides that in all matters relating to children, whether private or public, or in courts, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. Additionally, nations should ensure that children are capable of expressing their views freely in all matters affecting them, giving due weight to the age and maturity of the child.

This is contrary to traditional American law, which provides that absent proof of harm, courts and social workers simply do not have the authority to intervene in parent-child relationships and decision-making. The importance of this tradition and practice is that the government may not substitute its judgment for that of the parent until there is proof of harm to the child sufficient to justify governmental intervention. It is clear that in two very important areas of the parent-child relationship, religion and education, there will be potential for tremendous conflict.

The international committee in Geneva, in reviewing the laws of practice of countries that have ratified the CRC, has expressed its concern that parents could homeschool without the view of the child being considered; that parents could remove their children from sex-education classes without the view of the child being considered; that parents were legally permitted to use corporal punishment; and that children didn’t have access to reproductive health information without parental knowledge.

The bottom line is the CRC would drastically weaken the United States’ sovereignty over family life, which would have a substantial impact on every American family. For more information on the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, visit www.parentalrights.org/learn.

Article taken from: http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/washingtontimes/20091120.asp

The Call to Dunkirk

The Origin of Christmas

My husband read to me last night Answers in Genesis’ article on the Origin of Christmas.  I found it to be a good, informative article meant to address a couple of serious questions that people may have about Christmas:

Is the true origin of Christmas pagan?

Was Christ really born in December?

I encourage the curious to check it out!

Things I Want to Do Differently

I’ve been examining the question lately: What are holidays really? They are days that we set aside as special days to remember something great or important.

It seems to me that some days bear greater recognition than others and hence that not all holidays are equal. Following this train of thought I think to myself: Being a Christian is the most important thing in my life, so holidays that celebrate important Christian events hold the most importance for me. Of Christian holidays , the most important would be the those that celebrate the most significant to the Christian faith. The most pivotal event to the Christian faith is Christ’s death and resurrection, so celebrating this should be the most important to Christians, right? The time of year that Gentiles celebrate this is during Easter. I really am no fan of the name “Easter” (named after a pagan goddess named Ēostre) so as others before me have also done, I prefer to refer to the day I celebrate Christ’s resurrection as “Resurrection Day”.

So this past year, armed with my resolve to make Resurrection Day a special celebration, I began to look all through the stores for some festive decorations. I was quite surprised by the serious lack of anything Christian linked to the holiday with which to celebrate in my most frequented store, Walmart. So I made a special trip to the Christian bookstore and was shocked to find just one item. The Easter/Resurrection Day holiday had been taken over by bunnies and chicks! Okay, so that didn’t work out so well. I also realized that having celebrated Christmas a mere 3 months prior, that we were neither in the mood nor had the finances to have “another big holiday” so soon. I came to realize that if I was going to really try to make something special out of the Resurrection Day celebration, that Christmas was going to have to be scaled back. So only able to make a small effort out of Resurrection Day this past year, I have determined to change things the next time around.

Christmas is the celebration of the miraculous and the beginning of the promises and prophecies given, and Christ’s birth is a necessary precursor to Christ’s death, but should the celebration of Christ’s birth all but supplant and negate the celebration of His resurrection? Something just seems a bit out of place about that to me. So it is my resolve to find a smaller but still meaningful way to celebrate Christmas and to find a way to make Resurrection Day into more than just a day of chocolate baskets and egg hunts and closer to the celebration that it really should be.

The Prodigal Son: The Main Theme, Part 2

I believe that the main point of the prodigal son is the same as the main point in the story of the laborers and the vineyard.

“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in his vineyard. He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard. About the third hour he went out and saw others standing in the marketplace doing nothing. He told them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.’ So they went. He went out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour and did the same thing. About the eleventh hour he went out and found still others standing around. He asked them, ‘Why have you been standing here all day long doing nothing?’ ‘Because no one has hired us,’ they answered. He said to them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard.’ When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first.’

The workers who were hired about the eleventh hour came and each received a denarius. So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius. When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. ‘These men who were hired last worked only one hour,’ they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.’ But he answered one of them, ‘Friend, I am not being unfair to you. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the man who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’ So the last will be first, and the first will be last.” Matthew 20:1-16

If the story about the prodigal son were just about mercy, then it could easily have ended with the father throwing the younger returning son a party, but it didn’t because the story wasn’t over.

In the parable of the prodigal son, Jesus presented the son as a character who was disrespectful to his father by demanding his inheritance right then and living as a wasteful drunk and gigolo. The son brought deep shame on his family by his riotous living. By the law of Moses, this son deserved to be stoned.

“If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.” Deuteronomy 21:18-21

So instead of the grand welcome home which we’re all familiar with, what should have happened was the younger son be greeted with rocks being hurled his way.

In the setting that Jesus lived in , honor and shame were of much more consequence. Honor and shame affected more than a single individual; the honor or shame a person received was shared by their family. A family’s status was determined by societal rank. If you were a family with honor, you were much more likely to be trusted in life and day to day business; it was easier for you to find a good husband for your daughters, and so on. A family of shame might be mocked and ridiculed, or shunned. The honor or shame of a person very much affected their family’s fate.

So the audience that heard Jesus’ story would have remembered that this son had lived in a manner that deserved death; they also would have realized the shame and stigma that this son had brought on his family. In light of all of this, the elder son cannot be blamed for his attitude and resentment. The younger son had lived in a most vile manner, had shamed his family, and made himself deserving of death. Give this son a party? No way! Not only that, but the elder son happened upon the party! If anyone was deserving of a party, it was him, the loyal, faithful, hardworking son, not this drunken gigolo! The story was intentionally set up so that after hearing the background of the younger son’s actions, the audience would be crying in support of the elder son’s protest. This is exactly the point to which we were to be led, because the main point of Jesus’ story is that it is the right of the father to show mercy his son if he so chooses in the same way that it is God’s right to show mercy to those whom He chooses.

The common theme is God’s sovereignty. The point is best stated by Paul in Romans 9:14, 15:

“What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’”

God has the right to administer mercy and compassion as He sees fit.

In the story of the laborers and the vineyard, the landowner chastises the grumbling workers who expected to get better treatment than the latecomers stating that since it’s his money, he has the right to decide to do what he wishes with it. He wished to show a kindness and give a bonus to those who didn’t have the opportunity to work all day and so that’s what he did. The point of the story is that just like people have the right to spend their money how they choose, likewise God has the right to show mercy and kindness to those He chooses.

The Prodigal Son: The Main Theme, Part 1

I’d say that most of my life I believe that I missed the main theme to the prodigal son. When this story is taught, the only part I’ve ever heard discussed is God’s mercy. God’s mercy is no doubt a big theme in this story, but I believe that a greater theme yet lies in this parable. Let’s read.

“Jesus continued: ‘There was a man who had two sons. The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate.’ So he divided his property between them. Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had, set off for a distant country and there squandered his wealth in wild living. After he had spent everything, there was a severe famine in that whole country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to a citizen of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed pigs. He longed to fill his stomach with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything. When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired men.’ So he got up and went to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him. The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate. Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing. So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on. ‘Your brother has come,’ he replied, ‘and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.’ The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him. But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’ ‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ ” Luke 15:11-32

Were you able to see it too? Were you able to find an alternate main theme as well? In case you’re scratching your head trying to figure out what I’m talking about, I’ll write more in a subsequent post.

God’s Sovereignty

As people living in the 21st century, we are blessed to have forefathers and ancestors who have recognized many of God’s precepts and have incorporated them into our heritage so that a foundation has been laid for us. As a result of this foundation, it is a natural thing for most of us to understand basic Biblical principles of morality, so natural that we rarely question its source. The downside to this, however, is that sometimes our thinking gets twisted. Our thinking becomes twisted to the point to where we try to make God into what our perception of Him should be instead of finding out Who He is and realizing this to be the true source of what is good, moral, and holy. Goodness, morality, and holiness are defined by God, not the other way around. This is why it is essential for us to read through the pages of God’s Word to find out Who He is instead of trying to make Him into our conception of Who He should be.

God is sovereign. This means that He has the power to do anything He chooses, and since He is God, He would not be unjust in any of His decisions. Good and evil are defined by His Person. Things that are pleasing and in agreement with His character are good and holy; things that are displeasing and offensive to Him are evil. How we have come to understand morality is in light of His Person and the things He has shown and commanded of us. It is because God has told us that murder is wrong, that we as a people realize this as a heinous crime that is unacceptable by society.

Many people get confused on this point of sovereignty and come up with a few false conclusions. One of the biggest false conclusions of sovereignty is that one who is sovereign always gets the things that one wishes. Sadly life isn’t always that black and white. For example: I love my daughter and want her to love me. However, I would never want her to be forced to love me because love that is forced is not truly love. I would want her to love me of her own choosing. So even if I were a sovereign being, I don’t think that I would force her to love me because my desire to have her love me freely is greater than my desire for her to love me. From what I read in the Scriptures, God is much the same way. He desires that all men be saved, but not all men are; why not? It’s because there is something that He wants more than all men to be saved; He wishes men to choose to accept His grace and His gift of salvation rather than force it upon them.

To recap, sovereignty means that God is capable of doing whatever He wishes. However, because of His nature there are many things that He would never do. Also sovereignty does not mean that God gets everything that He wants because as in the example above, some of the things that He desires are complex in nature and so His desire for men to have free will may outweigh some of His other desires like the desire for all men to be saved.

Let us read and study God’s Word to find out what it says about Him and Who He is instead of trying to conform Him into our image of Who we think He should be.

Never Really Saved to Begin With?

Ben (Kangaroodort) of Arminian Perspectives has put up a great post here showing how those who claim that all who fall away were ‘never saved to begin with’ would have to very creatively interpret quite a few passages in the Bible to support that doctrine.

Cain’s Offering

Ever wonder why Abel’s offering was accepted and Cain’s offering was rejected?

“To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it,’ “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.” Genesis 3:17

The ground was cursed, and so Cain’s offering was cursed, that’s why! It is pretty universally known that you shouldn’t offer cursed offerings to God. Cain should have known this, so perhaps this is why God admonished him to do what he knew was right.

“The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. Then the Lord said to Cain, ‘Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it.’” Genesis 4:4b -7

In case you’re thinking, but it was easy for Abel to offer a lamb, after all he was a shepherd; Cain, on the other hand, was a farmer, and so his fruit was what he had. True, but consider this: Cain could have easily kept a few sheep himself or it shouldn’t have been too hard for him to trade some of his vegetables with his brother for a good lamb. Either way, Cain should have been willing to put in a little effort to bring to God a pleasing offering.

I’ve known far too many Christians with much the same “I’m going to do it my way” approach to things. God isn’t pleased when we do it our way by either intentionally ignoring His commands or just by refusing to read His Word to find out what He wants and requires of us. Be assured that like Cain we will give account of our actions to God. Let us strive to make our lives, our “living sacrifices” pleasing to God.

“I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” Romans 12:1, 2

Christian Persecution Still Happens: Who will care for their children?

I got an email with this title from Focus on the Family. I thought the story interesting enough to share. The following is a reprint of the email that I received:

In the summer of 1999, a twenty-one year old college student named Michael Job was killed in India by fanatical Hindus. His father was well know evangelist and Christian worker, Dr. P.P. Job. The fanatics did not like Dr. Job or his Christian message, so they killed his son.

Dr. Job was devastated–but not broken. He responded to the hatred by starting an orphanage unlike any other in India.

• This orphanage is only for girls…strange enough in a culture that doesn’t value girls.
• And even more unusual–this orphanage is only for girls of persecuted and martyred Christians.

Today the Michael Job Center for Orphan Girls is a dynamic refuge for hundreds of girls of persecuted families from all over the Indian sub-continent.

Each child that comes to The Michael Job Center is a vision of hope for the future–a hope that is born out of sorrow and strengthened with love.

But more children are waiting! Sponsor an orphan girl for just $25 per month and you will prepare the way for more girls of persecuted Christians to be rescued from a life of poverty and hopelessness.

Decline in blogging

I know I haven’t kept up with blogging very well.  Things have been a little crazy over here and aren’t likely to improve just yet.  Will write again soon.  Rachael

Attempting to Sidestep Jesus’ Words on Divorce and Remarriage

I was recently speaking to someone on the subject of divorce and remarriage and here are some of the objections that were raised and my answers to those questions.

Scenario: A man cheats on his wife, divorces her, and wishes to remarry his lover (who was also married at the time).

Question: “Since this man has divorced his wife, and he wishes to marry his lover, can he Biblically?”

Answer: No!

“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.“ Luke 16:18

Question: “But if the man has already ‘broken the marriage covenant’ and the ex-wife is ’seeing someone else’, wouldn’t the abomination mentioned in the mosaic law about a man divorcing his wife, letting her marry someone else, and then remarrying her apply (Deuteronomy 24:1-4)?”

Answer: Absolutely not. Dating is hardly the same thing as marriage. If the man wishes to do things Biblically, he should seek his wife’s forgiveness and reconciliation. Even she refuses to reconcile, then this does not free the man up to remarry.

Objection: “But God can forgive the sin of adultery.”

Reply: Notice that Christ did not say, “…if the unrepentant man marries another woman, he commits adultery…” Repentance of former adultery and divorce is therefore a non-issue in relation to one’s marriage status. Don’t confuse God’s forgiveness with the consequences that people must sometimes face for their actions. Even should a person sincerely repent for a sin that they’ve committed, it does not mean that the consequences for that sin are removed. Consider this, when Moses struck the rock after God had told him to speak to it, God refused to allow Moses to enter the Promised Land. Don’t you think that Moses was contrite when he realized that he had angered God? Knowing the relationship that Moses had with God, being one of the few people who have ever had the opportunity to look upon God, I would say that they had quite a close relationship. I’m sure that Moses was quite contrite for his actions. He had, however, dishonored God in the eyes of the people and that action carried consequences. I’ve also several people talk about David’s sin time and time again, saying “but God forgave David!” Yes, God did forgive David, but David’s actions still carried consequences. David lost 4 children for his sin (wow!) and nearly had his kingdom taken from him. The same is true in marriage. Though a person may regret and repent of their fornication and their divorce, this still does not free them from the consequences of their action. In this case, the consequence is being unable to remarry.

Also of note: The DMV or BMV has a motto: Driving is a privilege, not a right. This slogan’s purpose is to point out that the driver has to abide by certain rules and not to abuse the license he has been given, or it is their right to revoke that license. You could say that the same rule applies in marriage, but more so. Marriage is a privilege and a gift from God. God is the One Who instituted marriage and continues to sanctify it, and it is God sets the rules for marriage. If God decides that those who would divorce their wife have forfeited their right to remarry, then this is perfectly within His right as the One Who created us and gave us marriage in the first place.

Objection: “But Jesus’ words were meant for the Jews who thought that they could divorce their wife, remarry, and still be right in the eyes of God. His words do not apply to us.”

Reply: Totally untrue. When Christ speaks of this subject, He references the creation and how God intended things. When He mentioned the Mosaic law, He says that God permitted the act of divorce out of the hardness of men’s hearts, but that this was never how God intended for things to be. (Mark 10:2-12) Those who wish to follow God’s commands and live as Christ’s disciples are definitely obligated to live by His words. Christ specifically says that God’s design was for marriage to be between one man and one woman until the end of their days on earth. I would say that taking Christ’s words and trying to invalidate them in the lives of fellow Christians is a very grave error and transgression that needs to be repented of.

“We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, ‘I know him,’ but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.” 1 John 2:3-6

For more reading on this subject, see my previous post, Jesus’ Words on Divorce and Remarriage.

Jesus’ Words on Divorce and Remarriage

This topic is spoken of directly by Jesus and appears twice in the Gospel of Matthew and once in the Gospels of Mark and Luke. How often do you hear it spoken of in church? I was brought up in church by my parents and I can tell you that I’d never heard this topic talked about until I reached adulthood and then even that has been severely limited. When I realized what the Bible had to say about the subject, as my husband and I have moved from place to place and have had to look for a church to attend, we’ve asked different pastors what their stance on divorce and remarriage was. If it weren’t a serious topic, it would have been funny watching them as they stumble over themselves in sheer awkwardness. Some pastors have never even studied on the subject, one admitted that he was still in the process of studying it, and many others who know what the Bible says, do their best to sidestep it the best they can. I’ve learned that it is a rare pastor who will try to formulate a position that’s based on the Bible at all, even if it is slightly variant from what I think the Scripture is saying.

So let’s examine for ourselves what the Scriptures say on this topic.

“The Pharisees came and asked Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” testing Him. And He answered and said to them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to dismiss her.” And Jesus answered and said to them, “Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” In the house His disciples also asked Him again about the same matter. So He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” (Mark 10:2-12)

Points from the Scripture:

1) In the Old Testament and under the Old Covenant, divorce was allowed, but Jesus clearly states that this was not the way that God intended for it to be.

“I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”(Matthew 19:9)

2) The only clause kept in the New Testament for divorce is for the reason of an unfaithful spouse.

3) Remarriage for the divorcee is called adultery. (Except those divorced for reasons of spousal infidelity.)

“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” (Luke 16:18)

4) Marrying a divorcee is also adultery.

Besides these Scriptures, I would urge the reader to remember that vows made before God should not be taken lightly. Do not forget that marriage is a vow to your mate before witnesses and most of all before God.

POSSIBLE QUESTIONS:

I’ve divorced my husband, what now?

If your husband has not remarried and you are able, then seek reconciliation. If that isn’t possible, then make the best of your current state and serve God in your singleness.

“But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.” (1 Corinthians 7:11)

I’ve married a divorcee or I’ve been divorced and remarried, what do I do now?

Acknowledge your sin before God and repent in your heart for the wrong you’ve done. However, what’s done is done. God hates divorce and would not have you now go out and create more divorce and adulterous relationships by divorcing your current spouse. Make the best of what you now have and serve God the best you can in your current marriage.

“I hate divorce,” says the Lord God of Israel…” (Malachi 2:16)

“When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, when she has departed from his house, and goes and becomes another man’s wife, if the latter husband detests her and writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her as his wife, then her former husband who divorced her must not take her back to be his wife after she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the Lord, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.” (Deuteronomy 24:1-4)

Now I know sometimes that quoting the Old Testament laws can get sticky, but I think that it is always of note when God mentions something being “an abomination” before Him and uses language talking about polluting the land with sin. So while this was written to the Israelites as part of their law, I think that God’s feelings on this matter have not changed.

CONCLUSION

While quite the awkward subject, the church’s failing to address this issue has left devastating results. Coupled with our society’s espousal of divorce of first marriages because they were made “when I was young and stupid” and divorce of those “they’ve fallen out of love with”, the divorce and remarriage rate is skyrocketing. About 50% of marriages end in divorce. The church has been no exception to this rule! The mindset “if I mess up, there’s always another chance to marry the ‘right’ one” is completely unacceptable. There is no such thing as a “starter marriage”! We as a church need to address this topic again, even if it is awkward. Responsibility and consequences must be shown to turn the tide for the next generation. We must teach our generation who have not heard God’s word and our future generation the necessity to use wisdom and caution when choosing a mate, show them the permanence that God expects of those who would take the marriage vow, so that when they do choose, they do so very carefully. If we are to stem and turn the tide of this collapse of the family, we can no longer remain silent on this issue.

Ignorance Is Not an Excuse

I found it interesting while reading through the Old Testament law that the commands that God gave His people He expected them to keep. Ignorance of the law was not an excuse. As soon as the person who had broken the law found out about it, he wasn’t given a freebie and told, “Since you didn’t know the law, it’s okay this time, but next time do better.” Instead, once the person found out that he had broken the law, he was required to make atonement for his transgression. I found that principle interesting. Though he acted in ignorance, he was still a transgressor who had to make atonement. Ignorance of God’s law was not an excuse from keeping it.

I pondered this principle for quite some time, thinking of the state of the church. There are so many people who profess to be Christians and yet, they don’t know God’s Word. They don’t study it. They are ignorant of what it says. One night while studying the Bible with my husband, I stumbled across something else that Christ said that seemed to further demonstrate this theme. In Luke 12, Christ tells His disciples a parable about a master returning to home to his servants from a wedding banquet, telling them to watch and be ready for their master’s return.

“The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. I tell you the truth, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the menservants and maidservants and to eat and drink and get drunk. The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers. That servant who knows his master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.” Luke 12:42-18

So 3 types of servants are briefly mentioned here:

1. The servant who knows and does his master’s will.
2. The servant who abuses his master’s absence and mistreats his fellow servants and becomes a drunkard.
3. The servant who does not know his master’s will and in ignorance does “things deserving punishment.”

Notice the fates of these servants:

1. The servant who knew and did his master’s will was rewarded.
2. The servant who knew and did not do his master’s will was severely punished.
3. The servant who did not know his master’s will and did not do it was also punished, albeit, lightly.

So that brings us back to main point of this post: ignorance is not an excuse. Those ignorant of God’s Word will be punished still.

God expects us, His servants, to know His will and requirements by studying His Word. Saying to God “but I didn’t know” when we have access to the Scriptures is completely inexcusable.

Let us study His Word so that we may do His will and be ready for the Master’s return!