Day One Study—Get the Big Picture

What does the Bible say?

Read 2 Timothy 4:6-22, (including verses from the last lesson). Ask the Lord Jesus to teach you through His Word.

If possible, print out the verses we are studying. Use your own method (colored pencils, lines, shapes) to mark 1) anything that grabs your attention, 2) words you want to understand, and 3) anything repeated in this passage. Draw arrows between thoughts that connect. Put a star  next to anything you think relates to being faithful or staying faithful.

1. What grabbed your attention from these verses?

2. What verses or specific words do you want to understand better?

3. What topics are repeated in this passage or continue an earlier discussion in this letter?

4. What verses illustrate or help you understand what staying faithful looks like?

5. From this lesson’s passage, choose one verse to dwell upon all week long. Write it in the space below. Ask God to teach you through this verse.

Respond to the Lord about what He’s shown you today.

Day Two Study

Read 2 Timothy 4:9-16. Ask the Lord Jesus to teach you through His Word.

What does it mean?

6. What did Paul ask of Timothy in vv. 9, 11, 13, and 21?

Historical Insight: “Winter” severely restricted travel in some parts of the Roman world. Timothy needed to leave Ephesus soon, so he could reach Rome without undue difficulty.

In Paul’s final words we get an intimate glimpse of his character, needs, and humanity. Although Paul had the assurance of eternal life and confidence in Christ, he felt the pain of loneliness in his situation. Let’s look at those who were with Paul but were now gone.

7. Demas (v. 10). Demas was one of Paul’s close associates. Read Colossians 4:14 and Philemon 24. Demas had been with Paul in his first Roman imprisonment.

• What did Paul say about Demas in 2 Timothy 4:10?
• What could that mean?

Focus on the Meaning: Did he desert Christ or just desert Paul? We can’t tell from this context. If he was afraid of being caught, Thessalonica was safer than Rome.

8. Who else did Paul mention in 2 Timothy 4:10-14, and what is said about them?

Historical Insight: Nothing is known about Crescens, except he was dispatched elsewhere by Paul for God’s service. Titus was a close friend who aided Paul in two crises and pastored the church at Crete. Luke, the “beloved physician,” accompanied Paul on his missionary journeys and had shared the first Roman imprisonment with him (Colossians 4:14; Philippians 24). He wrote the books of Acts and Luke. Although Mark had been a deserter on the first missionary journey, he was now restored. Once considered untrustworthy (Acts 15:36-40), he was now helpful to Paul in his ministry. Tychicus was a close companion of Paul (Acts 20:4). He carried Paul’s letters to the Ephesians, the Colossians, and Titus (see Ephesians 6:21; Colossians 4:7 and Titus 3:12).

9. Alexander the metalworker (14-15). This Alexander may have been the same one mentioned in Acts 19:23-33. The one Paul named in 1 Timothy 1:20 might be a different person because Paul didn’t add “the metal worker” that time. Alexander was a common name.

• What does Paul say about him?
• What is Paul’s exhortation to Timothy regarding this man?

Historical Insight: In 2 Timothy 4:16 Paul talks about his “first defense.” This was most likely a preliminary hearing (leading up to his present trial) at which advocates for the accused person were usually heard. The Roman legal system allowed for several steps in the prosecution of an accused criminal. But in Paul’s case, no one came to speak in his defense or to stand by in support; everyone had deserted him (see also 2 Timothy 1:15). Under emperor Nero, it was dangerous to be a Christian in Rome. Identifying oneself with the courageous and outspoken apostle Paul would almost certainly result in agonizing death.

10. Paul seemed to understand the fear that gripped the Roman Christians. What was his response towards these friends and companions who abandoned him (v. 16)?

What application will you make to stay faithful to God?

11. Paul exemplified one of the toughest tasks a Christian may have to do—to leave his/her hurt with the Lord.

• Do you recall a time when you felt abandoned by your family and/or friends? What happened? How did their neglect affect you?
• When others oppose you and undercut your authority or desert you, what is your natural response? How could this natural response damage you more than the person inflicting such pain?
• Read Romans 12:17-20 and 2 Timothy 2:24-26 for the proper response. How do these verses motivate you to bring your emotions in line with Biblical truth when you’ve been deeply wounded by someone?

Focus on the Meaning: Paul strongly advocated being a “peace”-maker, but he did not promote peace at any price. In some situations, peace might give way to conflict if, for example, the truth is at stake (as we have seen in 2nd Timothy). In any case, the believer should not be the instigator of trouble under normal circumstances. If hostility does erupt, the Christian should not retaliate (“not take . . . revenge”). Rather, he or she should trust God to right the wrong … The expression “heaping burning coals on his head” supposedly alludes to the old custom of carrying burning coals in a pan. When one’s fire went out at home, a person would have to go to a neighbor and request hot coals that he or she would then carry home in a pan, typically on the head. Carrying the coals involved some danger, discomfort, and uneasiness for the person carrying them. Nevertheless, they were the evidence of the neighbor’s love. (Dr. Constable’s Notes on Romans 2014 Edition, p. 154)

Respond to the Lord about what He’s shown you today.

Day Three Study

Read 2 Timothy 4:9-22. Ask the Lord Jesus to teach you through His Word.

What does it mean?

From the Greek: “Strengthened” comes from the Greek word endunamai, which literally means to “infuse with strength.”

12. Focus on 2 Timothy 4:16-18. During that hour of darkness, who stood with Paul to strengthen him, and for what reason?

13. Look at Paul’s mission from Jesus in Acts 9:15-16; 22:14-15; and 26:16-20. Has anything changed even though 30 years have passed and Paul is an old man?

14. What had Jesus promised to His apostles in Matthew 10:17-20?

15. Before this time, when had Jesus stood by Paul and what did Jesus say to him then?

• Acts 22:17-21—
• Acts 18:9-10 —
• Acts 23:11 —

Summarize how Jesus consistently strengthened Paul.

16. What was the temporary outcome for Paul after his hearing?

Focus on the Meaning: “Delivered out of the lion’s mouth (v.18)” Some have seen this as a reference to Nero throwing Christians to the lions in the Coliseum, or perhaps to Satan (for a parallel, see 1 Peter 5:8). More likely, Paul used a common biblical metaphor describing deliverance from extreme danger (see, for example, Psalm 22:21; Daniel 6:22). Paul knew he wouldn’t get out of prison alive, though he was experiencing a temporary reprieve due to a delay in the Roman judicial system. (Life Application Bible Commentary)

17. According to verse 18, how does Paul view his impending death and what would happen?

Scriptural Insight: Look at the chart below to gain confidence about what happens when you die.

Paul was considering the coming heavenly kingdom as he wrote 2 Timothy 4:1-18, especially verses 1 and 18. Paul was likely referring to the way all Christians will participate in Christ’s rule when they enter His presence. That will include His millennial reign on the earth.

18. Paul’s confidence in and appreciation of God is absolute, despite the cruelest of circumstances. Just as Paul praised God in life, what does he write in the face of death (end of v. 18)?

Final words

19. What do you learn about Paul’s friends and associates from the following verses? We will see them in heaven one day. 

• Priscilla and Aquila (v. 19): Read Acts 18:2-3, 18, 26; Romans 16:3; and 1 Corinthians 16:19.
• Onesiphorus (v. 19): Review also what is said about him in 2 Timothy 1:16-18.
• Erastus (v. 20): Read Acts 19:22.
• Trophimus (v. 20): Read Acts 20:4; 21:29.

Historical Insight: The rest are likely members of the church in Rome. Linus may have been the first bishop of Rome following the martyrdom of Peter and Paul.

20. What are Paul’s final words in v. 22, which are also words for you?

What application will you make to stay faithful to God?

21. When adversity strikes, what is your “proclamation” towards God? Do you ever search for God’s purpose amidst your pain, or do you usually try and get out of the situation on your terms? Pray that God will continually help you to respond more like Paul—to be aware of His presence, draw from His strength, and be yielded to His purpose for you.

Think About It: Every time God allows us to be in difficulty, it is a marvelous opportunity to give witness and testimony. The most powerful witness is from people in pain, still walking in faith with Jesus Christ...theirs is the kind of stalwart, courageous witness that shouts and proclaims God is real. (Charles Stanley)

22. From this study, what have you learned about making the choice to live faithfully to your God every day?

Respond to the Lord about what He’s shown you today.

© 2019.

Lana was a starry-eyed newlywed, passionately in love with her new husband. Not two years before, she had been through a painful divorce. This time it's going to work, no matter what it takes, she told herself time and again. The failure of her first marriage haunted her. This time I'll do everything his way, and nothing will go wrong.

She and Jeff were both Christians. Although they attended a small fellowship, they had no close Christian friends. They had been married just six weeks when Lana began to feel sick. Her breasts were painfully sore, and she was constantly nauseous and sleepy.

I wonder if I'm pregnant . . .

The thought brought horror to Lana's heart. Jeff had made it very clear that he wanted no children for at least five years. Even after that, he wasn't so sure. "You're all I need," he'd told Lana. "I don't need any other friends, and I sure don't need kids."

But the pregnancy test she'd secretly purchased at the pharmacy confirmed her worst fears. Yes, Lana was pregnant. And she was terrified. What would Jeff say?

"Well, we'll just have to see about an abortion," he told her matter-of-factly when she finally found the courage to break the news to him.

"Some people think abortion is, well, murder," she remarked tentatively.

"Well, that's their problem. This is my life, you're my wife, and I'm saying that you're going to have an abortion. We've got a good thing going here and we don't need to mess it up with a baby." He gave her a hug and a kiss.

Lana was saddened. She kept having brief glimpses of a baby in her mind's eye—a baby who looked a little like her and a little like Jeff. But her commitment to her new husband overshadowed all other considerations.

All her life, Lana had been taught that Christian wives are supposed to submit to their husbands' authority and wishes. In her first marriage, she'd been less than cooperative, and the marriage had ended in divorce. As far as she was concerned, she'd learned her lesson. This time she would submit to her husband's orders—no matter what.

She called the local abortion clinic number, made an appointment, and walked into the clinic the next day with Jeff. She waited tearfully and nervously for her name to be called. As Lana finally got up to go into the cubicle where the abortion would be performed, she turned to her new husband and smiled bravely.

"I hope you know how much I love you. I'd do anything for you, Jeff."

What does submission mean? How inclusive is it? Does it mean that a wife can never disagree, can never have a part in decision making, cannot control the budget, write a check, or even have money to spend without accounting for it? Does it mean that a wife obeys her husband in the same way a slave obeys his master, or the way a child obeys his parents? Does it mean that a woman's personality is to be repressed or obliterated, having no valid expression? Is marriage a chain of command?

Accepting God-Given Authority

In the first place, let's consider God's view of human authority in general.

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

Romans 13:1-2

God has instituted human authority, and it is for our own good. First Peter 2:13 picks up the same theme. It says,

Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.

What does this mean? Paul and Peter are both saying that submission to God means submission to God-ordained authority. This means that rebellion against such authority is rebellion against God.

There are four major areas of authority addressed in the Bible—human government, church leadership, employers, and the home.

In the home there are two levels of authority. The first is the authority that both parents have over the children. The second is the authority that the husband has over the wife. Sometimes, when the subject of submission in the home is discussed, the wife is placed in the same relationship as the children. That should not be so.

In some churches and in some books and seminars, submission is so badly taught that women have been told to obey their husbands, even if they instruct their wives, as Jeff did Lana, to do something morally wrong.

Some Notable Exceptions

In thinking this through, I've come to realize that there are biblical exceptions to submission in every area of authority. For instance, with regard to obedience to government, the Hebrew midwives did not obey Pharaoh and kill all the little boy babies—thus Moses was saved and God blessed the midwives. Rahab did not obey her king and turn in the Hebrew spies—she and her family were spared when Jericho was destroyed. Daniel would not pray to an idol or to his king, and he deliberately disobeyed the king's decree. God honored him for his faithfulness.

As far as employer/employee relations are concerned, we read about three God-fearing young men who were administrators under Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. They would not bow down in worship to his image and laid their lives on the line as a result. And God rescued them from the fiery furnace.

There was also an obscure little man named Obadiah whose story is recorded in 1 Kings 18:9-14. When all the prophets of God were ordered killed by Ahab and Jezebel, he protected a hundred of them. He was employed as a servant of the king, and yet he defied his employer's orders.

God once blessed the actions of a son who disobeyed his own father. Saul's son Jonathan was ordered by his father to kill David. Instead he protected David, who was his closest friend.

And as for wifely submission, consider the story of Abigail. Her husband Nabal had arrogantly decreed that David and his men should receive no provisions from his vast and wealthy household. Yet Abigail disregarded her husband's orders and did just the opposite. She delivered massive supplies to the future king and even pleaded with him not to retaliate against her household in response to her husband's refusal to help, "because he is a fool!"

Why did Abigail do this? Because she was concerned that David, God's anointed king, not bloody his hands over her husband's churlish behavior. Because she was protecting her husband's life. And because she was saving the lives of all the men in her household.

Abigail was rewarded richly for her efforts. God struck down her foolish husband Nabal. David, the recipient of her generosity, was profoundly impressed by her wisdom and courage. Once she was widowed, he took her to be his wife.

Clearly, human authority can be abused. And as children of God, we must obey our Father. The apostles have set a vivid example for us.

The religious leaders of Israel, called the Sanhedrin, were supposed to be obeyed, and every good Jew obeyed them. Even if the men in the Sanhedrin were wrong, they were to be honored and respected. The Sanhedrin decided that the apostles could not teach about Jesus Christ.

Look at Acts 4:18-19.

Then they called them in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John replied, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard."

In Acts 5:28-29 the Sanhedrin's high priest again rebuked them,

"We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name," he said. "Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood."

Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!"

Obedience to God

We are not free to cop-out on responsibility by doing something wrong because an authority tells us to do it. All human authority is under the umbrella of God's authority, and God's authority must be obeyed first. You can't say "Well, my boss told me to lie and I have to lie because he is my boss," or, like Lana in our story, "I have to do this because my husband told me to." No, you don't have to!

If there is a conflict between God's rules and man's, the believer must choose to obey God. And bear in mind, there may be suffering involved. Of course we know, as 1 Peter 2:19 tells us, if we suffer for doing good, God is pleased with us.

Submission is not mindless, childlike obedience without responsibility for one's actions. So what is it? Whenever submission of the wife is taught in the New Testament, the headship of the husband is equally taught. It is a two-way street. Let's contemplate the husband-wife relationship, that very unique union which is so different from every other kind of authority/submission relationship.

In Ephesians 5:18-21, we learn that all Christians, men and women alike, are to be controlled by the Spirit of God. One of the evidences of the Spirit's control is submission to one another out of reverence for Christ. This kind of Christian submission is only possible if we are being controlled by the Spirit.

Who is doing the submitting in Ephesians 5:21? Everybody! It is a mutual submission. As Spirit-filled Christians we are to submit to one another. Then Paul goes on to be more specific. In the verses that follow, he describes how that submission looks in various categories. He talks about parents and children. Slaves and masters. Husbands and wives.

Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife, loves himself.

Ephesians 5:22-28

Submission vs. Obedience

How does "submit to your husbands" differ from Genesis 3:16 where God says your husband "will rule over you"? Are the two passages talking about the same thing? No, in fact they are quite different. The Genesis prediction comes as the consequence of sin. The Ephesians' imperative comes as the result of our being filled with the Spirit. The two are not the same at all.

First of all, let's talk about the word "submit." This is a different term from the word "obey," which is used in relation to children and slaves. It is important for us to understand that the word used to command obedience from children and slaves is never used in a command form for wives. The "submission" Paul applies to husbands and wives can be compared to the relationship between a president and a vice-president. They are equal in personhood, but they have different responsibilities. Since the president has greater authority, he also has greater responsibilities. This is true in marriage as well. God holds the husband responsible to love his wife and be a godly leader.

Paul says "submit" or "subject yourself" to your husband. Peter says "to your own husband." That eliminates the possibility of women being submissive to all men, a fallacy which is sometimes taught in Christian circles. Neither does it mean that single women must submit to single men.

Submit to your own husband as to the Lord—that is the command. So does your husband somehow become the Lord in your eyes? Should you submit to him unquestioningly just as if he were God? No! The Scripture simply means that you submit to your husband's leadership as an act of obedience to Jesus Christ. Do you see the difference? You obey Jesus Christ by your voluntary submission to your husband.

This kind of submission has nothing to do with inferiority. The fact that we see it in the Godhead confirms this. The Son submits to the Father. The Spirit submits to the Father and the Son. Yet Father, Son, and Spirit are each called God. There is no inferiority implied. There is simply order—the proper order which God has designed.

This voluntary submission is also a service rendered to God through the control of the Holy Spirit. It is not something that we are going to do happily on our own. At one time or another, all of us are bound to resist it. But keep in mind that while women are commanded to submit to their husbands, men are commanded to sacrificially love their wives.

Seeking the Will of God

What we often don't realize is that there are many blessings to be found in biblical submission.

I had to learn this by hard experience. When I was married thirty-nine years ago, there was no pre-marital counseling, nor were there the numerous books and courses on Christian marriage that we have today. My father had died when I was seven, so I was not accustomed to male authority.

When Fred and I married, I really didn't think much about this submission stuff. It took nine years of stubbornness on my part and determination on my husband's before the Lord penetrated my self-will with His Word. My husband and I were at an impasse. I wanted to do something that he refused to have done. I was reading Ephesians 5 one day, and the Lord clearly spoke to me from the written page. "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife . . ."

But Lord, what if I'm right and he's wrong? What will happen if we don't do something about this problem right away? My imagination projected all kinds of terrible consequences if we didn't do things my way. But the Lord kept up the pressure, and finally I said, "Lord, I am Your child and this is Your Word which I must obey. I want Your will for my life more than I want my own way. I am willing for my husband to be an instrument in Your hands to show me Your will. And I will trust You to give him the right decisions."

From then on, before I suggested a course of action to my husband, I'd tell the Lord, "It's Your will I want. My husband's decision will be Your will for this situation."

It began to amaze me how many times we were in agreement. The tension and conflict caused by my insistence on my own way disappeared as I trusted God to speak to me through my husband.

This is the approach a Christian woman can take whether she is married to an unbeliever, an immature believer, or a strong leader. When we depend on God to use the instruments He has provided for our guidance, He has a way of changing minds, wills, and actions to bring about His purposes.

I should tell you that it took a year before what I thought had to be done right away was done. And none of the dire consequences I thought would result ever happened. God understands the pressures that submission brings into our lives and He is there to help. All He wants is that we want His will above all else, even our own way. There is a wonderful freedom and peace when we view the marital relationship this way.

Marilee was the youngest of six children and had moved from New York to California to marry Ted. Most of her brothers and sisters still lived on the East Coast, as did her widowed mother. In recent months her mother's health had deteriorated dramatically.

Each of Marilee's siblings had shared the responsibility for the dying woman, financially and with physical care. Ted had been generous about sending money to New York to assist with medical bills, but he stubbornly refused to allow his wife to go care for her mother. There had been several unpleasant conversations about the subject, and Ted's final words had been, "The answer is no, and don't ask me again!"

"It's so unreasonable!" Marilee fumed as she spoke to her friend Helen. "We've got plenty of money, and Ted and the kids are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves for a few weeks. He's just being controlling, and I hate it!"

"I don't blame you at all, Marilee . . ." Helen was frustrated with Ted, too. But good friend that she was, she didn't want to fan her friend's anger into full flame.

"I feel like taking money out of the bank, buying a ticket, and just leaving. That's what I should do. What if Mom dies before I can get there? I'll never forgive myself. I haven't seen her in five years, Helen. Five years!"

"Well, before you do that, let's pray together. I think God may want to do something about this Himself."

"Like what?" Marilee was so incensed, she couldn't even imagine God being on her side in the matter.

"Like changing Ted's mind."

"Oh, sure. Right. Ted's mind? God might be able to create the universe in six days, but He'll never change Ted's mind!"

Helen shook her head and smiled. "Come on, let's pray anyway."

Reluctantly Marilee brought the whole issue before the Lord. She told Him how angry she was. Before long tears replaced her rage—grief over her mother's impending death. How she longed to see her again before she died. But then she added, "Lord, I want Your will more than my own way."

Helen hugged Marilee before the two parted. "I'm expecting a miracle, whether you are or not!"

"Well, God can do anything, I guess. But this seems pretty hopeless."

That night while Marilee was preparing dinner, Ted walked into the kitchen, and rather timidly handed her an envelope. "Marilee, I think God wants you to have this . . ."

"What is it?"

"It's a plane ticket to New York. You leave Friday, and the return date is open. I wasn't sure how long you'd need to stay. The kids and I will be fine."

Marilee stared at Ted in absolute shock. "What on earth changed your mind, Ted?"

"I don't know. I just got to thinking about how I'd feel if my own mother were sick, and I realized I was being unreasonable. Sorry, Honey." Ted grinned sheepishly. "You know how I am . . ."

This applies to unbelieving husbands, too. So don't say, "Well, my husband isn't a believer so I'm not going to submit to him." Just pray for him. Submit to him. And leave the rest with God.

Of course, wives must submit to their husbands in everything certainly does not refer to sin. No wife should ever submit to a dishonest or immoral plan. And even in the case of righteous or neutral decisions, from time to time we all have our own personal struggles with submission.

Remember the reason we are to submit. Because, just as Christ is the head of the church and the church is His body, so the husband is the head of the wife (Eph. 5:23).

A Special Kind of Love

When you read the passage on marital submission in Ephesians 5, you notice that much more responsibility is given to the husband than to the wife. Paul concludes his remarks by saying,

Each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Ephesians 5:33

This word "love" is not that affectionate, loving friendship we find in Titus 2, where women are instructed to love their husbands. This love is the Greek word agape. Agape love is far more an act of volition than of emotion. It is a chosen attitude in which a man lays aside his own selfish desires and his own rights and takes care of his wife.

As Paul instructs husbands to love their wives, he uses the analogy, "just as Christ loved the church." How did Christ show His love for the church? Jesus Christ did not have to leave His throne in heaven. He did not have to come to earth, to live in poverty for thirty-three years in a human body. He did not have to suffer at the hands of sinful men. He did not have to die. Jesus Christ gave up His rights so that we could have eternal life. And this is the same type of love a husband is supposed to extend toward his wife.

Agape love is not dependent on the recipient. It is an act of the will. It is a commitment. "Love your wife as your own body" and because she really is an extension of your body. Here, again, the one-flesh relationship of Genesis 2 is emphasized. The wife is not a child, not a slave, not a toy, not a property. She is his complementary partner, one flesh with him. He is to nourish and cherish her just as he nourishes and cares for his own body.

Seeking Her Highest Good

Biblical marriage requires mutual submission. Yes, the wife yields her rights and submits to her husband's leadership. But the husband is to yield his rights to independence, to controlling all the money, and to making all the decisions. He is to recognize that he is married to a woman who is one flesh with him.

For some men, this is a difficult assignment and a big issue. It is very hard for a man to sacrificially give up his own rights for the sake of his wife. And yet God requires an unselfish love that seeks the woman's highest good, with no hint of her husband lording it over her. This view of marriage is distinctively Christian, an expression of God's love acted out through the control of the Spirit.

As a matter of fact, Christian marriages were astonishing to the Roman world. In a society where women had no rights, here was wifely submission balanced by loving sacrificial headship. Marriage was placed on a very firm basis of mutuality, with both partners having equal rights. Such an arrangement was revolutionary in that day.

I remember hearing a prominent leader say, "A husband's responsibility is to find out his wife's strengths and skills and to do everything he can to develop them." And this man was as good as his word. When he realized that his wife Jean was gifted at writing, he saw to it that once the children were grown, she went back to graduate school and got her degree in journalism. Today his wife is a well-known author and speaker, because her husband took it upon himself to encourage the use of her gifts and bring her to fulfillment. That is what loving, sacrificial headship can accomplish.

When comparing marriage with Christ's relationship to the church, Paul says, "This is a profound mystery." Now the word mystery in the Bible is not like an Agatha Christie novel or a "Perry Mason" episode on television. A mystery in the Bible is something that cannot be found out by human reasoning but must be revealed by God.

How can God take two totally opposite people and make them one? And how can Christ be wedded to the church in one body? Both are, indeed, mysteries. Do you see why Satan attacks Christian marriages? Because he wants to defile and distort the picture God has given us to illustrate His Son's relationship with the church.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.

1 Peter 3:7

Some people have understood the expression "weaker partner" to mean that the wife is weaker physically, mentally, spiritually, and morally. This is not the case. Paul is talking solely about her physical distinctiveness. Woman was created to bear children, not to chop down trees.

It is interesting to note that a man's prayer life can be blocked if he does not respect or honor his wife. Both partners must keep grace and forgiveness alive in the marriage. When bitterness and resentment are given a place in the home, more is lost than personal warmth and enjoyment. The vital element of the husband's prayer life, through which he receives both guidance and assistance, will be hindered. No couple should attempt to function within the confines of that sort of handicap.

A man should prayerfully take his wife's concerns to heart when making any decision. He should listen to her. He should pray with her. He should seriously consider the consequences she might bear in the wake of his choices. There ought not be too many instances in a good, healthy marriage where a man actually moves in a direction of which his wife disapproves. I heard one of my professors say, "Men, if your wife doesn't agree with a major decision, don't do it. Ask God to bring her into agreement if it's His will."

Becoming a True Husband

Marriage should provide a warm and healthy environment where the wife can grow to her full potential. She should thrive under her husband's protection, encouragement, and selfless provisions.

I found some powerful insights in a book by Dwight Small called Marriage as Equal Partnership. It comes to us from a man's point of view and summarizes a husband's headship in a clear and eloquent manner.

Headship is not at all a husband becoming a master, boss, tyrant, authoritarian—the dominant coercive force. Neither does it imply control or restriction. His being assertive and her being suppressed. And it cannot mean he assumes any prerogatives of greater virtue, intelligence or ability. It does not mean that he is active and she is passive. He is the voice and she the silent partner. Nor does it mean that he is the tribal chief, the family manager, the one who has superior rights or privileges. He is not the decision maker, problem solver, goal setter or director of everyone else in the family's life. Rather he is primarily responsible for the common advance toward freedom and fellowship—creating a partnership of equals under one responsible head. . . . Throughout the equalitarian process the husband knows all the while that he bears the responsibility, before God, for the healthful maintenance of the marriage. . . .

We are on the safe side when we see the definition of subjection in the person of Jesus himself. He, being equal with the Father, relinquished that equality to become the servant of us all. . . . Every Christian is called to servanthood as the expression of his or her new life in Christ. Servanthood is the identifying mark of every true Christian believer. A servant's role is to make sure that the other person's needs are met.

In marriage, servanthood is an act of strength, not weakness.

Say not, my soul, “From whence
Can God relieve my care'
Remember that Omnipotence
Hath servants everywhere.

His help is always sure,
His methods seldom guessed;
Delay will make our pleasure pure;
Surprise will give it zest.

His wisdom is sublime,
His heart profoundly kind;
God never is before His time,
And never is behind.

Hast thou assumed a load
Which none will bear with thee'
And art thou bearing it for God,
And shall He fail to see'

- J. J. Lynch

The Disciplines of Life, by V. Raymond Edman (Minneapolis: World Wide Publ., 1948), p. 78.

Who is Responsible for a Child’s Character?

Introduction

When my wife and I attended a baby shower several months ago we came across this statement in a scrapbook which almost perfectly reflects my feelings as I approach this topic:

“I once had no children and six theories on child-raising.
Now I have six children and no theories on child-raising.”

My wife and I have six children, one of whom is with the Lord. It is absolutely amazing how having five children softens the dogmatism with which I once spoke on the subject of child-training. My personal preference would be not to speak on this subject at all, for many years. Yet Proverbs has so much to say on the subject. Furthermore, many of you have young children and find this one of the most urgent concerns of your life.

Before we begin our study let me caution you that no one is ever completely objective about this matter, nor is anyone fully authoritative. Certainly children cannot be objective, for they are the recipients of the process of child-training. I have heard some very authoritative words on this subject from those who do not have children and who are not even married. While they can certainly share the Scriptures with us on this subject, they cannot speak out of their own experience; and wisdom in Proverbs is never an armchair acquaintance with the truth but a practical skill in applying it.

If you think I am implying that since I have five children I am thereby an authority on child-raising, let me be the first to correct you. If simply having many children made one an authority on child-training then anyone with a large family could be called on for expert advice. But, to tell the truth, all we might be able to speak about would be bearing children, not raising them. I want to confess to you at the outset that I do not know nearly all I should about child-raising, and a great deal of what I do know I am not practicing as I should.

Those whose children are grown are not always the most authoritative experts either. Those who have been fortunate enough to have their children all turn out well may be inclined to take too much credit for the results. There is not one parent who is able to take the credit for children who grow up to be godly, for that is the result of the grace of God. Any successes in our family life are in spite of many failures on the part of the parents.

Another problem is that there are godly parents whose children have been a disappointment and a heartache who may have something worth saying about child raising, but they are reluctant to speak and we are even more reluctant to hear from them. We want to hear from those who are successful, not from those who have tasted the bitter pill of bearing a foolish son or daughter. If this is your mentality, then you might as well stop reading now, for Solomon, the primary contributor to the Book of Proverbs, seems to have failed badly in raising his son Rehoboam to be a wise man (cf. I Kings 12).

The question I am raising is this: “Who is responsible for the character of our children?” I have already suggested that parents do not have as much control over the lives of their children as some teachers have taught. There are here, as in every other area of biblical doctrine, two extremes to which we can go. On the one hand, we may conclude that the spiritual life of a child is totally the responsibility of the parent. This is not only unbiblical, but tends to greatly distort the parenting process. On the other hand, we may go to the opposite extreme of fatalism, whereby we conclude that we have no responsibility for the spiritual life of our children. This leads to complacency and disaster. My desire is to approach the subject of the responsibility of parents and their children from the perspective of the Book of Proverbs, and the entire revelation of God in the Bible. I believe we will find that the truth lies between these two extremes, and that our study can relieve much guilt and frustration on the one hand, and yet inspire more diligence and prayer on the other. Let us look then at the question of responsibility in the rearing of our children. For what does God hold parents accountable?

Godly Parents May Raise
Children Who are Foolish and Shameful

While it is not what I want to hear, I am forced to concede that Proverbs teaches the painful possibility of raising a son or daughter who is foolish and shameful.

The proverbs of Solomon. A wise son makes a father glad, But a foolish son is a grief to his mother (Prov 10:1).

A wise son accepts his father’s discipline, But a scoffer does not listen to rebuke (Prov 13:1).

A wise son makes a father glad, But a foolish man despises, his mother (Prov 15:20).

A foolish son is a grief to his father, And bitterness to her who bore him (Prov 17:25).

He who robs his father or his mother, And says, “It is not a transgression,” Is the companion of a man who destroys (Prov 28:24).

There is a kind of man who curses his father, And does not bless his mother. There is a kind who is pure in his own eyes, Yet is not washed from his filthiness. There is a kind--oh how lofty are his eyes! And his eyelids are raised in arrogance (Prov 30:11-13).

Some might be willing to admit that some parents could raise a foolish child, but refuse to concede that a godly parent could do so. But I find it hard to see why an ungodly parent would be grieved at raising an ungodly son. When Peter spoke of Lot’s vexation at the sin of his city, he spoke of him as a righteous man, whose “righteous soul was vexed” (2 Peter 2:7-8). It is the righteous who are grieved by unrighteousness. Let us press on.

Solomon Versus Sigmund Freud
Determines the Character of a Child

We should begin by acknowledging that parental failure does have an adverse effect on both parent and child. In the words of Proverbs,

The rod and reproof give wisdom, But a child who gets his own way brings shame to his mother (Prov 29:15).

Yet having said this I must also point out that the emphasis of Proverbs is that it is not the parent who is ultimately responsible for the character of the child. The foolish child has chosen to pursue life along the path of folly. The penalty which the foolish son will bear is that which he deserves. In chapter 1 both father and mother have taught their son about the two paths of life, and have warned of the danger of joining wicked men in doing evil. Yet after this parental instruction, wisdom speaks concerning the fate of those who will nevertheless choose to walk in the way of the fool:

“They would not accept my counsel, They spurned all my reproof. So they shall eat of the fruit of their own way, And be satiated with their own devices. For the waywardness of the naive shall kill them, And the complacency of fools shall destroy them” (Prov 1:30-32).

The individual responsibility of the child for his choices in life is taught elsewhere in Proverbs:

If you are wise, you are wise for yourself, And if you scoff, you alone will bear it (Prov 9:12).

The foolishness of man subverts his way, And his heart rages against the Lord (Prov 19:3).

So we find in Proverbs that the foolishness of a man is not the fault of his parents, but the result of his own decision, the reflection of his own heart. While parents may suffer grief at the foolishness of a son, they are not said to suffer from guilt, for he alone must bear the consequences of his decision to walk in the way of folly.

Further evidence of the responsibility of the child for his character is found in the first nine chapters of Proverbs. While chapters 10-31 teach us about the characteristics of the wise, chapters 1-9 emphasize the choice which is necessary in order to enter the way of wisdom. If there is one word which summarizes the mood of these early chapters it is “appeal.” Both father and mother urge their son to heed their teaching, to seek wisdom as a thing of great value.

Hear, my son, your father’s instruction, And do not forsake your mother’s teaching; Indeed, they are a graceful wreath to your head, And ornaments about your neck (Prov 1:8-9).

My son, if you will receive my sayings, And treasure my commandments within you, Then you will discern the fear of the Lord, And discover the knowledge of God (Prov 2:1,5).

My son, do not forget my teaching, But let your heart keep my commandments (Prov 3:1).

Hear, O sons, the instruction of a father, And give attention that you may gain understanding (Prov 4:1).

Every appeal of these early chapters of Proverbs is based on the same premise: a father and mother can teach a child about wisdom and urge him to pursue it, but they cannot make the decision for him. Indeed, a child of wise and godly parents may choose to play the fool in spite of their diligent efforts to train him otherwise.

What of the Promise of Proverbs 22:6?

Wanting desperately to believe that parents who are diligent in training their children to be godly are guaranteed good results, many turn to Proverbs 22:6 for biblical support. While it is my personal preference to have such a guarantee, I do not believe the passage teaches any such thing. I should first say that no matter what interpretation we arrive at, Proverbs does not give us promises as much as maxims. For example, while diligence is essential for prosperity, diligence does not guarantee prosperity in Proverbs. Even if Proverbs taught that diligence in child training produced godly children (which we have seen is not necessarily so), it is no guarantee that the faithful efforts of godly parents always produce godly children.

In the estimation of many great Bible scholars, Proverbs 22:6 does not refer to moral instruction at all, but rather spells out a principle of education: Training suited to the student will not be wasted effort. The NASB renders this verse,

Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it. But the Hebrew text literally reads, Train up a child according to his way, And when he is old he will not depart from it.

Since I intend to deal with this passage more extensively in future lessons, let me simply point out several observations about this text which are relevant to our study.

1. THE IMPERATIVE IS “TRAIN UP,” WHICH SHOULD SERVE AS A CLUE TO THE EMPHASIS OF THE PASSAGE. Parents are commanded to train up their children. The emphasis here seems to fall on the need for child training, not the nature of it.

2. THE EXPRESSION “WAY” ALMOST ALWAYS HAS REFERENCE TO THE NATURE OF A CREAURE, OR ITS HABITUAL PATTERN OF CONDUCT:

There are three things which are too wonderful for me, Four which I do not understand: The way of an eagle in the sky, The way of a serpent on a rock, The way of a ship in the middle of the sea, And the way of a man with a maid (Prov 30:18-19).

It is pressing this term very hard to render it “the way he should go.”

3. THE TERM “DEPART” IS NOT A TERM WHICH IS USED OF APOSTASY. In Proverbs it is most often employed with reference to departing from evil (cf.Prov 3:7; Prov 13:19; 16:17).

These and other factors incline many scholars to conclude that this passage does not promise godly children to parents who are faithful in raising them in a godly home. Speaking with reference to the view which we have rejected, Dr. Otto Zockler writes:

Yet although the third [view] presents the highest standard and has been generally adopted and used where little account is made of the original, it has the least support from the Hebrew idiom.⁴¹

With this Derek Kidner agrees:

The training prescribed is lit. “according to his (the child’s) way,” implying, it seems, respect for his individuality and vocation, though not for his self-will (see verse 5, or 14:12). But the stress is on parental opportunity and duty.⁴²

Proverbs is thus consistent in teaching us that there is no guarantee that godly parents will have godly children, even though they may be completely faithful and diligent to their parental duties. Kidner comments:

Many are the reminders, however, that even the best training cannot instill wisdom, but only encourage the choice to seek it (e.g. 2:lff.). A son may be too opinionated to learn (Prov 13:1; cf. Prov 17:21). A good home may produce an idler (Prov 10:5) or a profligate (Prov 29:3):he may be rebel enough to despise (Prov 15:20), mock (Prov 30:17) or curse (Prov 30:11; 20:20) his parents; heartless enough to run through their money (Prov 28:04), and even to turn a widowed mother out of doors (Prov 19:26).While there are parents who have only themselves to thank for their shame (Prov 29:15), it is ultimately the man himself who must bear his own blame, for it is his attitude to wisdom (Prov 29:3a; 2:2ff.) his consent given or withheld (Prov 1;10) in face of temptation which sets his course.⁴³

Parental Responsibility
in the Old Testament

The teaching of Proverbs is consistent with that of the entire Old Testament. While parents are commanded to train up their children in the way of the Lord (cf. Deut. 6), they cannot determine the spiritual destiny of their children. As distressing as it may be, godly parents had ungodly offspring, and it was not necessarily a failure on the part of the parents.

Isaac bore Esau, a man who disdained spiritual things (cf. Heb. 12:16). Noah’s son Ham, having been spared from the destruction of the flood, fell under the curse of his father (Gen. 9:20-27). Manoah and his wife knew the shame of a son who had much power from God, but was foolish--Samson (cf. Judg. 13-16). Eli’s two sons were worthless, godless men (1 Sam. 2:12), but Eli was not held accountable for their unbelief, only his failure to restrain them (1 Sam. 3:12-14). Samuel’s sons were also wicked (1 Sam. 8:1-3). While I have always thought that Samuel failed in the same way as his predecessor Eli, the text nowhere attributes any blame to Samuel for the spiritual condition of his sons. This, of course, does not mean that he could not have failed; it only points out that the wickedness of his sons was viewed as their sin, not

Throughout the Old Testament I find that there is no one-to-one correlation between the spiritual condition of parents with that of their children. Godly parents can have wicked children. Wicked parents had godly children. The spirituality of the parents did not predetermine the spiritual condition of their children.

For example, recall the biblical record of the kings of Israel and Judah. Jehoshaphat walked righteously in the way of his father, Asa (1 Kings 22:41-44). Ahaziah, son of Ahab and Jezebel, followed in their wicked way (1 Kings 22:51-52). Asa, son of wicked Abijam, did not follow in his father’s way, but did what was right in the sight of God (1 Kings 15:9-15).Ahaz, son of Jotham, did not do right as his father had, but walked in the evil way, just as the kings of Israel (2 Kings 16:1-4).

That each individual is responsible for his own sins is seen in the Law, for no parent was to be punished for the sin of his son, nor was the son to be put to death for the sin of his father.

“Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin” (Deut. 24:16).

It might appear that the sins of the fathers would inevitably become the sins of the sons from this Old Testament text:

“You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me” (Deut. 5:9).

The principle which is laid down here, however, is not that the sons are destined to commit the sins of their fathers, but that our children do suffer when we sin. The consequences of our sins are unfortunately born, in part, by our children.⁴⁴ Both Daniel and Nehemiah, men who lived in the period of Israel’s captivity, acknowledged that the people of God had been cast out of the promised land because their fathers had rebelled against God (Neh. 9; Dan. 9).It was not just for the sins of the fathers that they suffered, however, but for their own sins as well, as both Nehemiah and Daniel reveal in their prayers (cf. also Isa. 65:7; Jer. 3:25). Thus Daniel could say, in truth, both “we have sinned” (Dan. 9:8) and “they have sinned” (Dan. 9:7-8).

The prophet Ezekiel corrected a serious misapplication of the principle of Deuteronomy 5:9:

Then the word of the Lord came to me saying, “What do you mean by using this proverb concerning the land of Israel saying, ‘The fathers eat the sour grapes, But the children’s teeth are set on edge’? As I live,” declares the Lord God, “you are surely not going to use this proverb in Israel any more. Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die. But if a man is righteous, and practices justice and righteousness, . . . if he walks in My statutes and My ordinances so as to deal faithfully--he is righteous and will surely live,” declares the Lord God (Ezek. 18:1-5, 9).

The Israelites of old were pre-Freudian in their thinking. They believed that they were only being punished for the sins of their fathers. Because of this they had become fatalistic and complacent. What good was it to be righteous when they were going to be punished (for the sins of their fathers) anyway? Ezekiel taught the principle of individual responsibility: if a man is righteous, he will live, but if he sins, he will suffer the penalty. Man will either be rewarded or punished for his own actions, not those of his parents.

To avoid any misunderstanding of the principle of individual accountability Ezekiel gave some specific applications of his teaching. A righteous man may have a wicked son, for whose sins he is not accountable. Only the son is responsible for his sins (Ezek. 18:10-13). A wicked man may have a righteous son. The son will surely live, but the wicked father must die (vv. 14-18). The principle is clearly stated in verse 20:

‘The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.”

Ezekiel carries this principle even further. If we are not rewarded or punished on the basis of the deeds of our parents in the past, neither are we bound or blessed by our deeds of the past. The one who has lived wickedly may repent and live righteously and be forgiven of his past deeds (vv. 21-23).So also the one who once lived righteously, but has turned to the way of evil cannot rest on his past righteousness, but will be punished for his present sins (v. 24). We are never given the option to use the past as an excuse for the present, either with regard to the deeds of our parents or regarding our own actions.

No truth is more clearly or consistently taught in the Old Testament than this: while the parent is responsible for his own conduct and character, he is not ultimately responsible for the character of his child.

Responsibility for Children
in the New Testament

The teaching of the New Testament is entirely consistent with that of the Old regarding the responsibility of the parents for the character of their children. Christian parents are responsible for the instruction and correction of their children.

And, fathers, do not provoke your children to anger; but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord (Eph. 6:4).

While parents should train their children in the ways of God, they cannot be held accountable for the decisions their children make concerning their relationships with the Lord. One evidence of this is what God requires of church leaders concerning their children. Certainly God’s standards for elders and deacons would not be lower than those for other Christians. In 1 Timothy 3, elders and deacons are to be evaluated in terms of their skill in managing their homes, as well as in keeping their children under control, but not for their salvation.

He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?) . . . Let deacons be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households (1 Tim. 3:4-5,12).

Some may wonder if Titus 1:6 does not contradict what I have just said, for it appears that this text requires that an elder’s children be saved.

Namely, if any man be above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion.

Is this passage not quite clear? Does an elder not have to be evaluated by the spiritual condition of his children? Bengel thought so: “He who could not bring his children to faith, how shall he bring others? “⁴⁵

The question must really be reversed though. Can any Christian be held condemned for his failure to lead a person to Christ, or be praised for having caused one’s conversion? The truth is that no one can cause another to be saved. While we are commanded to bear witness to our faith, we are not commanded to bring about the conversion of particular individuals. Would our Lord have satisfied Bengel’s requirements? Did He save all to whom He ministered? And what of Judas? Did Paul successfully convert everyone to whom he witnessed? Did all of Paul’s converts remain steadfast?

We cannot bring anyone to faith. Only God can give men faith and new life. We can only witness to the truth of the gospel and urge men to accept Christ. Whether it is our children, our parents, or our neighbors, we cannot be held responsible for the conversion of any. We are only responsible to live godly lives and to bear witness to our faith. Why then could any elder be judged by the faith of individual members of his family?

How then can we explain Titus 1:6? I believe the explanation is quite simple. First, we must ask how such an important requirement, if it is a requirement, could have been omitted in Paul’s epistle to Timothy. Second, we need only to look in a Greek lexicon to discover that the Greek word pistos is most often employed with the meaning “faithful” in the sense of inspiring our faith or confidence (cf. Titus 1:9, “the faithful word”). That is the way the translators of the King James version understood it, rendering the word “faithful.” Third, we should also recognize that the phrase following the word faithful is a further explanation of it. How are the “faithful children” of the elder to conduct themselves? They are not to be accused of dissipation or rebellion. I prefer the rendering of the NIV here, “not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient,” a qualification which agrees with that of 1 Timothy 3.

Conclusion

The implications of this lesson are far-reaching. Let me first speak to those who have not yet come to faith in Jesus Christ.

1. YOU CANNOT REST ON THE FAITH OF YOUR FATHERS. I know there is a song entitled, “Faith of Our Fathers,” but let us not fail to grasp its meaning for us. The faith of our fathers was a holy faith, but it is not our faith. The object of their faith and ours is the same--Jesus Christ, but their faith is not our faith until we personally come to accept Christ as the One who died in our place at Calvary, and whose righteousness is ours, resulting in the forgiveness of sins and eternal life. It doesn’t matter whether your father was a preacher, a missionary, or a church leader. The only way you will be saved is by your personal decision to trust in Christ. This is why the first nine chapters of Proverbs urge the child to walk in the way of wisdom.

As someone has well said, God has no grandchildren. Each generation must decide to trust in Christ or to reject Him. In the Old Testament God made a covenant with Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3), but He personally reaffirmed that promise with each new generation: with Isaac (26:24), with Jacob (28:13-15), and with his sons (cf. 49:lff.; Ex. 20:lff.; and all the Old Testament promises to Israel). Faith is an individual matter. You cannot inherit salvation from your fathers, for it is a gift from God to those who call on Him for salvation.

2. YOU DARE NOT BLAME YOUR PARENTS OR YOUR PAST FOR YOUR UNBELIEF. Many explain their decision to reject Christ in terms of the past: they knew too many hypocrites; their parents were too legalistic; their past is too sinful to forgive. None of these excuses will impress God. You will never experience the torments of Hell because of someone else’s sin, but only because of your personal rejection of God’s provision of salvation. And, lest you would somehow blame God, He does not delight in the condemnation of any. He delights to forgive men of their sins.

“Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked,” declares the Lord God, “rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?” (Ezek. 18:23)

3. YOU MUST DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE EXPRESSIONS OF CHRISTIANITY AND ITS ESSENCE. The Israelites of old began to confuse their ceremonial observances of the law with genuine faith. So many men and women today think that they are saved by going to church, giving when the offering plate is passed, serving on a committee, or being baptized. While God does prescribe how we should conduct ourselves as Christians, it is not our conduct that saves us, but Christ. Too many of our young people have seemingly fallen from faith when they went off to college or left home, but the truth is that they only conformed to the family code, they never adopted it for themselves, nor did they see a personal relationship with Christ as the foundation of it all. Let us be very careful to distinguish between form and substance when it comes to our faith.

The primary principle which underlies this message is this: PARENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO BE GODLY AND TO TRAIN THEIR CHILDREN IN THE WAY OF GODLINESS, BUT THEY CANNOT MAKE THEIR CHILDREN GODLY. Let me mention several applications of this principle.

1. GODLY PARENTS WHO GRIEVE OVER THE OUTCOME OF THEIR CHILDREN CAN DO SO WITHOUT GUILT. If the Bible teaches us anything it certainly teaches that a godly parent may have children who are not godly. This means that the spirituality of the parent cannot be measured by the spiritual condition of the child. If your child has not chosen to follow in the way of the Lord, it is ultimately the responsibility of your child. You can not make a child be godly, only God can. You can be godly and yet raise a godless child. Don’t assume guilt for which you are not responsible.

If you are like me, you are very aware of your failures as a parent. No one I know of in the Bible or in my experience has been a model parent. We all have failed. If our children have chosen to follow God, we dare not take credit for the grace of God in their lives. And when we have failed we may find comfort here too, for God has provided forgiveness for our parental sins just as He has for all others. And we can find comfort that our failures at parenting will not be the reason our children are godless, just as our successes will not be the reason they are godly. For every sin there is forgiveness. Let us find comfort as parents that the unpardonable sin is not the sin of failing as a parent.

2. WHILE WE NEED NOT WALLOW IN GUILT OVER THE FAILURES OF OUR CHILDREN, WE DARE NOT BE COMPLACENT EITHER. Ezekiel found it necessary to rebuke the people of God for their complacency toward sin. They excused their own sinfulness by blaming it on their forefathers. We should not be complacent just because we cannot save our children. We are commanded by both the Old and New Testaments to train up our children in the knowledge of God (cf. Deut. 6:6-9,20-25; Eph. 6:4). While we will not have to give account for the failure of our children, we will have to answer for our own sins as parents. We may not be able to save our children, but we can teach them God’s Word, urge them to trust in Christ, and pray for their salvation.

The fact that we cannot save our children should in no way discourage diligence in following through with our parental responsibilities. Although God is sovereign in salvation, we are commanded to evangelize. While we cannot save our children, God can. We should fervently pray to Him, knowing that He does not desire any to perish (2 Peter 3:9; of. 1 Tim. 2:4). And let us be warned by these words of our Lord:

“And whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea” (Mark 9:42).

3. ASSUMING MORE RESPONSIBILITY THAN WE SHOULD FOR THE OUTCOME OF OUR CHILDREN CAN GREATLY HINDER THE PARENTING PROCESS. Assuming too much responsibility for our children can be as destructive as assuming too little. If we believe that parents are primarily responsible for the spiritual condition of their children, then we will also conclude that our spirituality as parents can be measured by the spirituality of our children. This is dangerous and devastating.

For example, let’s suppose that the father of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32) is an elder in your church. What would you have expected him to do when his son asked for his money, knowing what he would do with it? The father would not dare let his child fail, for it would be considered a failure of the father. And yet this father is not only a model for us to follow as parents, he is also a picture of God Himself as He deals with us.

You see, it was only by failing that this “prodigal son” came to himself. It was after wasting his money and having to live with the pigs that he came to see the folly of his way. Then he repented and returned to his father. Which son, do you think, was wiser and more godly--the son who never dishonored his father, but who had never come to understand grace (like the Scribes and Pharisees of our Lord’s day), or the son who sinned and repented? This is precisely the question which our Lord asked the hypocritical religious leaders of His day:

“But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go work today in the vineyard.’ And he answered and said, ‘I will, sir’; and he did not go. And he came to the second and said the same thing. But he answered and said, ‘I will not’; yet he afterward regretted it and went. Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The latter.” Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you that the tax-gatherers and harlots will get into the kingdom of God before you” (Matt. 21:28-31).

It would seem to me that we are often too quick to judge the spirituality of children, when only time will tell. We seem to praise outward appearances of obedience and conformity, rather than to seek a spirit of obedience which may result in repentance, even after foolishness and sin. We need to give God time to work in the lives of our children, and to expect Him to work as much through their failures as He does through their obedience. After all, isn’t that how He works with us?

41 Otto Zockler, “The Proverbs of Solomon,” Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, by John Peter Lange (Grand Rapids: Zondervan [reprint], 1960), vol. V (of orig. vol. X of 0. T.), p. 192.

42 Derek Kidner, The Proverbs (Chicago: Inter-Varsity Press, 1964), p. 147.

43 Ibid, PP. 50-51.

44 Deuteronomy 5:9 teaches that our children do suffer consequences from the sins of their parents, but this is a far cry from saying that children will inevitably follow in the same sinful path of their parents. The child of an adulterer is not irreversibly destined to become a liar just because the father is an adulterer. The reverse of Deuteronomy 5:9 is also true. The child of righteous parents will experience blessing because of the parents righteousness: A righteous man who walks in his integrity--How blessed are his sons after him (Prov. 20:7).

45 Bengel, as cited by A. R. Fausset in his commentary on the epistle of Titus. Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., [photolithoprinted] 1967), VI, P. 517.