Why Men Don't Talk

Related Media

Lesson 1

I read a book a couple of months ago that really changed my thinking on a few things and helped me understand a lot more about myself. The book was The Silence of Adam by Larry Crabb. It was so good, that I read it twice. It is called The Silence of Adam because he starts off by asking where Adam was when Eve was talking to the serpent.

Tradition has always taught, and I had always assumed that Eve was alone at that time, and that after she was deceived and ate the fruit, she went in search of Adam and gave him some to eat. But Crabb pointed out that Adam was right there with Eve during the conversation with the serpent. When I read that, I immediately got off the couch and went to get my Bible to read the verse for myself.

Genesis 3:6 says,

When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, (imah) and he ate.

Wow! Adam was with her! I don’t know about you, but that blows away my categories. We always talk about how Eve was deceived, (In fact we read that three weeks ago in 1 Tim 2:14 right here in class.) And I think deep down, we sort of blame Eve for getting us all in this mess in the first place, even though we know technically that Adam was responsible.

But what if Adam was standing right there the whole time that Eve was talking to the serpent? I think this sheds new light on just how responsible Adam was for what happened. What does this say to us about not doing anything when we are not sure exactly what we should do or say? It sure makes inactivity look more sinful to me

If Adam was there, then why didn’t he say something? Why didn’t he tell the serpent to get lost? Why didn’t he correct Eve when she misquoted the command not to eat of the tree? Why didn’t he suggest they go somewhere else to talk about the situation? Why didn’t he stop Eve when she reached for the fruit?

Why Adam was silent? I’m not going to answer that right now. The answer will become obvious as we work through several concepts.

We are going to divide our study into the following topics:

The Search for Real Men
Man’s model—God’s role in creation, because man is created in God’s image and we need to see what that entails.
Man’s responsibility—to walk in God’s image.
Man’s natural tendency—to be silent.
--------------------------------------
What Speaking is Not.
The Reasons for Silence
The Solution
Woman’s responsibility

The Search for “Real Men”

I think the first time I ever heard any talk about “real men” was in college when someone said, “Real men don’t eat quiche.” I think there was a whole string of “real men” jokes going around then, but that is the only one I remember.

The traditional view of a real man is one who is broad-shouldered, self-confident, tough, unemotional and successful. If you ever read any Louis L’Amour books, the main character was always tall, dark and invulnerable and he didn’t talk much. John Wayne and Clint Eastwood always played that kind of man in their movies.

But for the past ten years there has been a call for men to be more sensitive, to be vulnerable, to share their feelings, to cry more. Men are supposed to be more concerned with connecting with others than with trying to achieve and conquer the world. I remember my dad once making the comment that there didn’t seem to be any actors rising on the scene to replace John Wayne and Clint Eastwood. Maybe that is the reason. Their character type was out of style. John Wayne has been replaced with Billy Crystal.

I think the John Wayne tough guy image is a warped model of what a man should be. But I also think that the soft, vulnerable, almost homo-sexual image that we are bombarded with in the secular media is a pendulum swing too far in the other direction.

There is obviously a problem, but what is the solution? What constitutes a real man?

In the Christian world, we’ve been trying to come up with the answer. We have Family Life Seminars, Promise Keepers conventions, hundreds of self-help books on how to be a good father, how to be a good husband, how to be a good whatever. The list of self-help books is endless.

I think that phrase “self-help” is significant. I don’t mean to discredit any of those things I just mentioned, because they all have their place. In fact, many of them were started because people felt like churches weren’t dealing with the issues. But our tendency, when we realize there is a problem, is to go find a book written by some expert with the answers or go to a “professional counselor” or go to some conference to learn some neat steps to follow or principles to apply, to get motivated to work hard, and then we go home and try really hard to follow those steps. We do them for the next few weeks or months. But eventually, we slip back into our old habits and wait for the next conference. Perhaps that is why the Promise Keepers have to come back each year. We don’t keep our promises. The problem is that we were doing all these things out of our own energy, not God’s energy.

In our day, too many men are seeking more diligently for their manhood, than for God. However, if you read the biographies of the great Christians of the past, like Dwight L. Moody, Hudson Taylor, etc., it becomes obvious that they sought God first. They spent hours in the word and in prayer. They were very godly men. And look what God did through them. They are remembered as great men. Therefore, I think it is safe to say, “The only way to be manly is to be godly.” (Crabb, p. 32)

How do we become godly? By reflecting the image of God. We can’t do that unless we know what God is like. So we need to study what God is like. That by the way is theology. I almost hesitate to say that because most people think of theology as booooooring, but you will see that is very relevant. It is relevant because if we are to be godly, we have to know what God is like.

The Model: God’s Role in Creation

Genesis 1:2 says that the earth was formless and void and darkness was over the surface of the deep. In other words, everything was chaos. Then, while everything was darkness and chaos, God spoke into the darkness and He created life and beauty.

For years, people have argued about the “Gap theory” or “Restitution Theory” which proposes that there were two creations. After the first creation, Satan messed up the earth and so God had to rebuild. All this was supposed to happen somewhere between Gen. 1:1 and 1:3.

I think one reason this idea became popular was to try to explain why there was chaos. The question people asked, was “Why would God create a chaotic earth on his first pass, and then have to come back and fix it up later?” The gap theory also gained popularity when science started saying that the earth was millions of years old. A “Gap” between a first and second creation left room for that. The fact that the earth appears to be millions of years old can be explained without a gap theory. If God created a tree, and we cut it down the next day, how many rings would it have in it? 50? 100? God created trees, man, everything, including the earth, with apparent age. So we don’t need a gap theory as an answer to evolution.

Also, a good understanding of Hebrew shows that there is no reference to a gap in time in Gen. 1:3.

So, why the part about the earth being formless and void in vs. 2? Let me propose another reason—a theological one.

When Moses wrote Genesis, he left out lots of stuff. He covered 6000 years in just a few pages, and then focused in on Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. I think Moses was very selective in what events he recorded. He only recorded what he did because they make a theological point. Therefore Gen. 1:2 is as much a theological statement as it is an historical one. It is not just giving us a chronological order of events.

When I say it is a theological statement I mean that, the part about the earth being formless and void is there to make a statement about God—to let us know what God is like. What it is saying about God is that God moves in darkness and chaos and creates order and life. The statement is there so that man, who is created to walk in God’s image will know what that involves. It involves moving into the chaos and creating order and life.

That brings us to the next point.

Man’s Responsibility: To Walk in God’s Image

Genesis 1:26 says that man was created in God’s image and one purpose was to rule over the rest of creation. Man was to help keep the order. One of the first things Adam did was to name the animals. That did three things:

It demonstrated his superiority over them, and fulfilled the command to rule over creation.
It helped fulfill his role of being in God’s image and taking part in creating order out of chaos.

Lori and I were talking about that the other day. If animals didn’t have names, you would find yourself saying things like... I saw one of those yellow, furry animals down by the creek today. The other person would say, “The one with the long neck?” Then you would say, “No, it had a short neck..” Then the other person would say, “The one with stripes?” “No, the one spots...” And on and on it might go. That definitely would be a chaotic situation.

Adam was also “like” God because naming the animals involved speaking into the disorder.

I imagine that naming all those animals was not easy. Imagine if someone brought a few hundred species of animals to you and asked you to name them. Would you be overwhelmed? Sure you would. It was probably all you could do to think of a name for your baby. And if you’re like us, you didn’t decide untill they were rolling mom and baby out of the hospital.

So, Gen. 1:3 says God spoke and then in Gen. 2:19-20 man spoke. There is a logical connection between the two. Man was reflecting the image of God by speaking into the chaos and creating order.

That is the theological basis for our study. God spoke into chaos and created life and order. Man is created in God’s image and part of man’s responsibility is to speak into chaos and create life and order.

How does that apply to us today? We don’t need to name the animals.

For me, that means that when life is chaotic, I need to speak. I need to say something and I need to do something. I need to get involved. I should not remain silent. If I remain silent, I am like Adam in the garden. I am sinning.

But man’s natural tendency is to remain silent. That takes us to the next topic.

Man’s Natural Tendency: To Be Silent

If Adam were the only man in the Bible who was silent, then perhaps one could say that this conclusion is doubtful. But, there are several examples in the Bible of men who were silent. Let’s look at them and see where it got them.

The Example of Adam

We’ve already looked at this one, but I just wanted to make it a part of the list so I could ask you what were the consequences of Adam’s silence? The result was that billions of people have lived miserable lives and then died and most have gone to hell.

The Example of Abraham

Everyone probably knows of God’s promise to Abraham (Gen 15)—that he would have a son and be the father of a multitude, through whom God would bless the world. After ten years, and no children, Sarah comes to Abraham and says, take my slave, Hagar, and have children with her so that God’s promise can come true. What did Abraham say to that? Nothing. Gen 16:2 says He listened to the voice of Sarah.

Then later after Hagar has Ishmael, Sarah is jealous and Abraham tells her to do what she wants to her slave. And he lets her treat Hagar harshly.

So, Abraham was silent and did what Sarah said. What was the result? The Arab/Israeli conflict that still rages today.

The Example of Lot

We know from 2 Peter 2:7f that Lot was a righteous man, but you would never know it from the Genesis account. He stayed in Sodom and Gomorrah and was silent about the evil around him. When he offered his two daughters to a crowd of men to protect God’s messengers, that was not the action of a strong man. At the end of that account, when they are fleeing the city, and Lot’s wife looks back at Sodom and turns into a pillar of salt, it becomes obvious who it was that wanted to live in Sodom and Gomorrah and who was in really running the family. If Lot was tormented in his soul by the evil around him (2 Pet 2:8), then why didn’t he leave? Because his wife didn’t want to. Lot remained silent and passive.

Some time later Lot’s daughters commit incest with Lot while he is drunk and they get pregnant. So, we see further damage result from Lot’s silent passive life.

The Example of Bethuel

Do you remember the story of how Isaac got his wife? His father, Abraham, sent a servant back to the home country to get a wife for his son, Isaac. In the account in Gen. 24, the servant goes to a well, meets Rebekah, follows her home, and then proceeds to bargain with her brother Laban for her hand in marriage for Isaac. At the end of the account, (24:50) it says Bethuel agreed to the arrangement. It seems to me that Laban was the one who was involved, and Bethuel was along for the ride. I can’t swear to it, but nothing is said about him, and he doesn’t speak until the end of the account.

What was the result? He had two very controlling children. Laban and Rebekah. We know that Rebekah was very involved with the deception of Isaac when Jacob deceived his father out of the family blessing. And we know that Laban made life miserable for Jacob when he tried to marry Rachel and got Leah instead. So, by being a silent and uninvolved father, Bethuel helped create at least two manipulative and very controlling children.

The Example of Isaac

We don’t have to read much further in Genesis before we come to the next silent man -- Isaac. He was a very passive man. If you read through Genesis, you see that he didn’t do anything right except allow his father to almost sacrifice him.

Isaac knew the prophecy of God that his older son, Esau, would serve the younger son, Jacob, but he preferred Esau who appeared to be a strong, manly man always out hunting. And at the end of his life, he was going to go ahead and bless Esau in spite of the prophecy. Why? I think it was easier to go along with the tradition of blessing the oldest son than to trust God and bless Jacob. Why? Perhaps he was afraid of Esau’s reaction? After all, Esau was the hunter. Perhaps he was afraid of what others might say when they found out. Because he was afraid to act, his wife tried to take over and handle the problem. It backfired and the family was split up and Isaac and Rebekah never saw Jacob again.

Conclusion

Here we have five examples of men who were silent. In each situation the result was much harm to others. We might say the result was chaos.

When God spoke, He made order out of chaos. When man fails to act in God’s image, and speak, the result is more chaos. And very important to recognize: It brings the severing of relationship. And that is what this is all about - relationships. How is my silence going to affect my relationship with others? The Bible shows that it wll definitely destroy them.

Adam’s silence destroyed his relationship with God and his wife.
Abraham’s silence resulted in the Arab/Israeli conflict.
Lot’s relationship with his daughters and his wife was not good.
Isaac had almost no relationship with his wife or son, Jacob. This is obvious when you read the story of Isaac’s deception at the blessing. Isaac never talks to Rebekah. He never talks to Jacob (except when he thinks Jacob is Esau). Rebekah never talks to Esau. And Jacob never talks to Esau. You see a family divided right down the middle.

Notice also that in each of these situations, when the man was silent, the women stepped in and took control. God said that was going to be the woman’s natural tendency in Gen. 3:16, and we can see it happening over and over again.

So, man’s natural tendency is to be silent. But what we’ve seen so far ought to do away with the description of a man as “The Strong Silent Type.” When you understand these principles, it makes you want to change it to “The Weak Silent Type.”

Summary

What we’ve seen is that God speaks into disorder and creates order and life.
Man is created in God’s image and should also speak into disorder and create order and life.
But man’s natural tendency is to avoid the chaos and to be silent.
When he does that he creates even more chaos and destroys relationships.

Homework

What I want you to do for homework this week is to be aware of your actions and inactions. When life presents you with some confusing or chaotic situation, what do you do? Do you shut down emotionally? Do you withdraw and go do something else? Do you get overbearing and try to control the situation? Think about how you react to disorder in your life, and then next week when we discuss the reasons for silence, it will hit a lot closer to home.

Lesson 2

Last week we began our study on why men don’t talk.

The first thing we saw was that there is a desire among most men to be “real men.” but what we usually do is go looking for a list of things to do or steps to follow which will help us become real men. We often are trying to do these steps out of our own energy and it usually fails. We concluded that in order to be a real man we needed to worry less about following a bunch of steps and instead strive to be godly men.
Being godly means being like God, so we needed to look at what God is like. In Gen 1:2 we saw that God moved into darkness and chaos and created life and order by speaking.
If man is created in God’s image then man needs to do the same. Men need to move into chaos and darkness and create order and life. We do that by speaking or doing - by getting emotionally involved.
But man’s natural tendency is to avoid darkness. Our natural tendency is to avoid messy situations. We saw five examples from Genesis of men who were silent, who avoided messy situations—Adam, Abraham, Lot, Bethuel, and Isaac. In all of our examples, the men were presented by a situation that was chaotic or messy. Actually it was just real life. But they didn’t do anything, and so their wives stepped in with suggestions, or deception or took over. In every example, the result was more chaos and broken relationships.
So, to sum up last week: When God spoke, He made order out of chaos. When man fails to act in God’s image, and speak, the result is more chaos. And very important to recognize: It brings the severing of relationship.

This week we are going to talk about why men are silent.

The Reality of Mystery

There are many things in life which bring pleasure, such as power, influence, money, status, connections, achievement, success, possessions, food, sex, recreation, etc. All these things are good in their place, but we have a tendency to think that they are the source of happiness. They make us feel good, but they don’t bring true happiness. They do not bring contentment.

? If you are looking for happiness in money, you can never get enough. I know you’ve heard the illustration about when John D. Rockefeller was asked how much money is enough, and he answered, “Just a little more.” We can’t believe that if we were millionaires, we would want more, but if that is what we are looking to for happiness, or security then we would.

? If sex is where you are trying to find happiness, your spouse will never satisfy you.

? If power is where you are seeking to find happiness, then you can never get enough.

? If possessions are where you try to find happiness, then your house is never big enough and your car is never new enough.

? If this is where you are looking for happiness, when these things are taken away, you will be devastated.

God wants us to enjoy these things, but enjoying these things is not the reason God put us here. God has created us with a purpose. The whole Bible is summed up with two commands - Love God and Love your neighbor. And Paul sums up the whole Law with the statement - Love your Neighbor, so God's purpose for us is to love others - to build relationships, to move into other people’s lives and help them move towards God. We will find the most joy in life when we are doing that. But relationships are messy. We talked a lot about chaos last week. Messy = chaos. Relationships = chaos. Relationships involve mystery.

We hate chaos and mystery. What we really want is certainty in life.

? It's true in relation to our religion. We want certainty in our religion. We want everything black and white. We want to think there are knowable right answers and so we argue about points of doctrine and split churches so we can hang out with those that believe the way we do and who will reinforce our opinions making us feel certain. It is too hard for many people to recognize that God is infinite and we are finite and there are just some things we can't understand. There are some things in the Bible that just aren't clear.

? It's true in the decision making process. We want to know if the decision we are about to make is the right one. We want God to show us exactly what we should do. But decisions are full of mystery. There is mystery involved in deciding who to marry, which job to take, whether to remodel our home, which car to buy, which stock to invest in, etc. Many of us are paralyzed by the process of making decisions and making a mistake. We can't decide what to do, so we do nothing.

? It's true in our relationships. There is no certainty in relationships. There is only mystery and chaos in relationships. People disappoint. They let us down, they hurt us... How will the person react if I do this or that? Will my wife still love me when she finds out I'm afraid of ...? Why is my wife depressed? Why is my son a bully at school?

So what we try to do is find a way to eliminate the mystery. How do we eliminate or dispel mystery?

The Search for Certainty

Recipe Theology

Many people have a recipe theology. Recipe theology holds out the false promise of certainty. By recipe theology I mean the belief that if we can just find the right set of steps or principles, and then follow them perfectly, then they will make life work. We really like steps to follow. That’s one reason why self-help books, the promise keepers conventions and family life conferences are so popular. We usually walk away from them with a list of things to do. Some people read the books, go to the conferences and come away convicted of their sin and a new resolve to trust God more as they move through life. But others just come away from the conferences with a new set of steps to follow. Recipe theology says, “If I pick up my socks, clean the kitchen for my wife and give up Monday night football, then my marriage will be great.” When that doesn’t work, then our conclusion is that those were the wrong steps and so we go in search of another list. We never realize that what we really need to do is learn how to relate to our wives.

I think one of the best passages and most misused passages on this is Eph 5:25. It says that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her. I’ve heard people teach on this passage and what they get from this is that we need to sacrifice ourselves for our wives. Then they give their list of things we can do to sacrifice ourselves. But, the whole concept behind this passage is that Christ came to earth to build relationships with men. We rejected Him and killed Him. What this means to a husband is that he needs to move towards his wife to build a relationship with her. In the process, she is going to reject him, argue with him, disappoint him, not respond to him, hurt him, etc. That is where the sacrifice comes in—in being willing to be hurt in the process of moving toward his wife. The sacrifice comes in being willing to enter the chaos and mystery of relationship.

Getting on With Life

Another way we can try to dispel mystery is by trying to ignore the need for relationships and concluding that we might as well "get on with life." So we run away from people and devote our energy towards manageable things, things we are good at. Often abilities surface like athletic talent, academic gift, or mechanical knack that give us a feeling of power, competence, appreciation, etc. When relationships are too confusing, too disappointing, we turn to the things that bring us those fleeting pleasures we talked about earlier. But they are fleeting, so we spend more and more time at work or buried in our hobbies, or in the garage fixing things, trying to satisfy the longing in our souls.

For example, if you are a computer programmer, I think it would be accurate to say that your job is never done, and if things are bad at home, it would be easy to always work late. You could honestly tell your wife that you are behind, because in that job, you are always behind. And to make it even more attractive, computer programming is a safe place to hide from people. A computer is just a dumb box that does exactly what you tell it. So you are in control. And when you are programming or designing a graphic or whatever, you are being creative. It appeals to and fulfills in a false way what God intended man to be.

Or maybe your solution is to go play golf or go fishing. Those activities are fun, challenging and most important, don’t require much in the way of relationships.

Be a Tyrant

Another way to try to dispel mystery is to be a tyrant. If your are overbearing and dogmatic, you can often beat others into submission where they won’t question you or you can at least keep them at a safe distance so that you don’t have to deal with the issues.

Dull the Pain

Others try to dispel mystery by trying to dull the pain through alcohol, pornography, etc. Of these four ways, this one is the least socially acceptable, but the other methods are just as evil and sinful.

Can you think of other ways we try to dispel mystery?

Three Styles of Relating

We must understand the principle that every man is moving. Movement defines a man's existence. If we are not moving in a good direction, then we will move in a bad direction. Good movement, means moving through personal unhappiness toward God. Bad movement is movement aimed at nothing higher than relieving personal unhappiness. The things we just talked about, dulling the pain, being a tyrant, getting on with life, and recipe theology are all examples of bad movement - of an attempt to relieve the pain.

Because men are fundamentally relational beings, all movement will be seen most clearly in the way a man relates.

The Needy Man

The needy man knows that he needs relationships to be happy, but his is a distorted view of relationships. What he wants is for others to come through for him and meet his needs, without them requiring good movement from him. He is actually looking for happiness in people and not from God. He is expecting people to provide those pleasures we talked about earlier.

This is the man who comes home every evening and lets out a heavy sigh when he walks in the door so that the family will know how hard he has been working all day for them (That’s a lie. He is working for himself.). He wants them to take care of him but he is sending out his signal hoping that they will not expect anything from him.

This is the man who feels like a martyr because he’s married to a woman who has no interest in sex. The reality is that she doesn’t respond to him, because he is not moving toward her and so there is nothing to respond to. When she doesn’t meet his needs, he feels like a martyr and feels justified in lusting after other women or having an affair, because it is his right to have his sexual needs fulfilled and his wife isn’t meeting them.

What this man needs to do is see his bad movement—see his evil—and repent. But the needy man doesn’t see it.

King Saul is a good example. He had a need for respect. When he failed to kill all the Amalekites and their animals as God had commanded (he left the king and the cattle and sheep alive) and was caught by Samuel, he starts scrambling and says that they saved them for sacrificing to God. When Samuel says it is better to obey than to sacrifice, Saul says, I have sinned, but then immediately asks Samuel to return with him to the capitol city and stand beside him in public worship. When Samuel turns to leave, Saul grabs Samuel’s robe and it tears. Then Samuel says, that the tearing of his robe is an illustration that God is going to tear the kingdom away from Saul. Saul again says, “I have sinned,” but quickly adds, “but please honor me now before the elders and the people of Israel ...” He was more concerned with appearances and keeping the respect of the people than with his sin. 1Sam 15:13-30.

Read p. 130

The Tough Man

Shallow but stable describes this man. He has the “get on with life” attitude we discussed earlier. This is the “strong silent type” we talked about last week. He rarely talks about personal struggles and tends to quickly "resolve" whatever relational tensions he can't avoid or dismiss. He focuses his energy on things he is good at and is unwilling, even for a moment, to entertain involving himself in something he is not good at—i.e. relationships. He wants to stay where he is comfortable. He wants to dispel the mystery.

Being tough doesn’t necessarily mean being mean or cruel. He doesn’t have to be abusive. He can be cordial all the time - and usually is. He is nice, above reproach, just emotionally uninvolved. He has lots of acquaintances, but no close friends.

He just doesn't let himself feel anything. The needy man feels the pain, and is preoccupied with it. The tough man ignores it.

The Godly Man

The godly man is sensitive, but it does not lead to self-preoccupation or complaint. He is hurt by broken relationships, but instead of demanding others to come through for him or running away, he uses the hurt to more sharply define and energize his call to move toward relationship. He is willing to sacrifice his pleasure (legitimate or illegitimate) so that he can help others. He releases other from his control and encourages them so that they are free to struggle with their loneliness and selfishness and pain. He’s been there through the struggles and has made it through to the other side—to God. He wants to help them find God too.

So, there are three styles of relating - You can be a needy man, always pulling on others to meet your needs. Or you can be the tough man and ignore your feelings and the feelings of others and focus your energy on things you are good at. Or you can be a godly man and feel your pain and the pain of others, but use it to grow personally, and then use your growth to help others grow.

What Speaking Is Not

We began last week by talking about the silence of Adam. By now you’ve figured out that being silent is not good. Running away from relationships is not good.

You’ve also probably made the corollary conclusion that this means we need to speak up.

As is usually the case, when we learn what we shouldn’t be doing, we jump up and decide that we are going to fix the problem. But, we usually go to the opposite extreme. So, we need to understand what to watch out for. We need to understand what speaking is not.

Speaking is not just meaningless talking.

You can talk a lot and never touch real issues. Maybe you talk about sports or about computers all the time and never have any meaningful conversations. I mention computers because that’s my weakness. When we do this, we are still being silent about the important things, even though our mouths are wide open.

Paul says in 1Co 13:1 that when we speak without love, then we are a noisy gong and a clanging cymbol. The ultimate goal of our study last week and today is really about how to have better relationships. It is about how to love. So Paul’s statement in 1Co 13 is very appropriate. Eph 4:15f is also related where Paul talks about speaking the truth in love.

Speaking is not just talking.

I say it again, because this time, I want to point out that for the purpose of our study, speaking involves actions, too. It involves both words and deeds. If you just say you are going to do something and never do it, then that is worthless. James talks about that in James 2. Speaking means getting involved. And I think I should stress that it means getting emotionally involved.

Speaking is not domination

Speaking is not controlling a situation through shouting the loudest or shaming the other person into submission or obedience. That just turns a person inward and away from God. You will either deaden others into conformity or incite them to self-preserving rebellion. You can see this in your children. If this is how you relate, one child might be complacent and compliant and the other one always in trouble at school.

What I want to make clear is that I am not saying that men should start dominating every situation and relationship around them. I’m not saying that we need to be dogmatic and just tell our wives to shut up when they disagree with us.

When you do that, you are not being a strong man. You are really just trying to take control (through your flesh) and force order on the situation and get others to back off so you don’t have to deal with the issue. You are hiding again as Adam did in the Garden.

Conclusion

All of these things are examples of what speaking is not. So what is speaking?

Speaking is saying or doing whatever is necessary to move myself toward another person and moving myself and that other person toward trusting God in the midst of the life, in the midst of chaos.

What Silence Looks Like: Some Modern Examples:

Example 1

Witnessing is a good example of chaos. When you are in the middle of a conversation with someone and the topic turns towards something that you could easily use to ask the person about their personal beliefs, what do you do? Do you speak? Do you ask them? Or do you ignore the prompting of the Holy Spirit because you fear their response might be to reject you? What you need to do is go ahead and ask them the question and trust God for the results. You need to move into the chaos and speak. But too often, we are afraid and we are silent.

Example 2

I was reading another book recently about shame based relationships and I realized that what I was reading in that book related to our topic. The book said that if you grew up in a family where you heard things like, “you’re not going to wear that are you...” or “I can’t believe you did that...”, etc. Then one of the ways your parents controlled you was through shame. Some call that a shame based relationship. Someone who grows up in that kind of environment is going to have a very low opinion of his ideas and capabilities.

With that in mind, think about the following situation: A husband and wife have different opinions about something. What does that mean? It just means they each have different opinions. It doesn’t mean one is wrong and one is right. If a man is married to a woman who has strong opinions and convictions, then she may come across with the attitude that the husband is wrong whenever his opinion differs from hers. If the husband grew up in a shame based relationship, then he will feel that his opinion is wrong when it differs from his wife’s. If he follows his natural inclination to be silent, then he will just shut up and let his wife’s opinion dictate family policies. That is not leadership. I’m not saying that the husband needs to always go with his opinion because he’s the leader. I’m saying he need to evaluate both honestly and openly and then go with what he thinks is the best one for his family.

But what will happen if the husband stands up to his wife and says, “Honey, I don’t think we should do that. I think we should do this instead.” She might follow his lead. She might also argue with him or get mad, or act hurt and avoid him. What if his decision turns out to be a bad one? Then she might say, “I told you so.” Even if she doesn’t say it, she will certainly think it.

That is real life and it is chaos. That might describe why Lot went along with his wife’s wishes to live in Sodom and Gomorrah.

Example 3

What do you say or do when your kid’s school teacher or Sunday school teacher comes to you and says Johnny was being mean to another kid or cheating on a test, etc.? Do you give him the spanking of his life when he gets home or ground him for a month? Or do you talk with him to try to determine what’s going on in that immature brain of his that makes him want to do those things? Maybe he is searching for attention that he isn’t getting at home. He may need to be disciplined, but only doing the discipline is often simply an effort to control the situation and the child as long as he is under your roof. You can discipline and never really be involved. If you never work on the relationship and find out why he misbehaved, then when he leaves home, he is going to do what his heart wants.

That is chaos. Those kinds of situations make many men freeze up, remain silent, and run away to something they are good at, or they lash out in anger and try to force others to get with the program.

The Solution

I can’t give you any steps to follow. You just have to understand your tendencies and recognize when you are slipping into that mode and then turn to God and move forward. The solution is to trust God and move towards others into the chaos.

There is often truth contained in lists and steps. But we put the cart before the horse. Lists and steps are actually a description of what a good relationship looks like more than they are a means of getting there.

It is the godly, manly man who, in the face of chaotic situations says, “I don’t know what to do God, but I think this is best for my family and I’m going to do it and trust you for the results.

The Woman’s Responsibility

Understand this struggle in men and in yourselves.

Understand the natural tendency to want to step in and take over (Gen 3:16).
Don’t try it, it will seem to work for a little while, but in the end, chaos will rule. (The message of Judges).
Trust God and wait.
That is the opposite of man’s responsibility which is: Trust God and move (speak).
Your responsibility is to trust God and be silent.

Related Topics: Christian Home, Marriage

Marriage, Abortion and Divorce

Related Media

The institution of marriage as a useful social factor is being challenged in our times. It is possible that there never has been a time in history when so many people entertained the thought that marriage is obsolete. There are a number of contributing factors to this growing concept that marriage is losing its usefulness.

One factor is an ever-increasing trend toward “a new morality” which says that sexual relations are legitimate without marriage. I have been told that a report based upon a questionnaire submitted to ten thousand college and university students showed that 62% engaged in sexual intercourse. All were unmarried. The consensus of the members of the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) is that people do not have to marry for sex. The SIECUS board is made up of psychiatrists, sociologists, clergymen and business men. The administrative heads in some colleges and universities have made it easy for male and female students to “shack up” together for the purpose of engaging in sexual relations.

Another contributing factor to the breakdown of marriage is a growing degeneracy among married couples. A cult known as Group Sex boasts of more than one million participants, better known as “swingers.” A husband and wife will join several other couples on a given night, or weekend, to engage in all sorts of sexual practices. This is known as the Orgy. Now this is not a commune of dirty, far-out hippies, but rather almost exclusively suburban married couples. Such immoral degeneracy has cast a shadow over the sacred institution of marriage.

The third contributing factor to the growing consensus that marriage is fast becoming obsolete is an increase in homosexual and other unnatural relationships. These sordid and perverted practices are affecting the institution of marriage. Homosexuality is the collaboration of two persons of the same sex for the purpose of promoting sexual excitement and gratification. One unauthorized source has estimated that there are in excess of five million homosexuals in the United States. All three of the above mentioned factors are strictly forbidden and strongly condemned in Holy Scripture.

The Bible is very clear on all points which relate to marriage. And I believe I am qualified to add my own experience. Mrs. Strauss and I have celebrated this year our forty-fifth wedding anniversary. Our's has not been the perfect marriage, however we have proven that God's principles and practices work. The longer we are privileged to live together as husband and wife, the more wonderful and blessed the marriage relationship becomes. Let me share with you some salient and significant thoughts from the Bible. These have helped us in our marriage, and I trust they will prove helpful to you.

The Provision
for the Marriage Relationship

In the wisdom and plan of Almighty God the marriage relationship between man and woman was provided. After God had created the earth and prepared it in every way to be suitable to man, He said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him” (Genesis 2:18). It seems that this was the one lack in Adam's life, namely, a woman who could be his companion, receive his love, and share his dominion over the earth. So God created the woman and presented her to Adam. The first marriage was God's doing. Marriage was not a human idea but a Divine institution.

It might surprise some of you when I point up the fact that the perfect man in the perfect environment was incomplete without the woman. Adam's living conditions were ideal, yet something important and necessary to him was missing. And it is evident from the biblical account that another person exactly like Adam could not meet his need. God knew that a male companion for Adam could never fill the void in his life. Man needs a woman.

Now there is an exception to this principle that, “it is not good that the man should be alone.” The exception is with the man who has the gift of celibacy, which is the state of remaining unmarried. Paul discusses celibacy in 1Corinthians 7:6-8. He states that where this exception exists it is a gift from God. Not that celibacy is a holier state than marriage. It is a false system of spirituality which contends that celibacy is somehow holier than marriage. Because of man's normal waves of libido, marriage can contribute to his spirituality, “for it is better to marry than to burn” (I Corinthians 7:9). The Roman Catholic Church is having serious problems in this area. It has been reported that more than 3,000 priests leave the priesthood every year, the majority of them giving as their reason the desire and need for marriage. Unless a man has the gift of celibacy, the Roman Church has no right to impose such a restriction on any priest. Moreover, young men considering the priesthood as their vocation for life should make certain that they possess the gift of celibacy. It was God who said, “It is not good that the man should be alone.”

You have no doubt heard it said that “marriages are made in heaven.” I heard a pastor make this statement, so I asked him to explain it. He told me he believed, “some marriages were made in heaven and some were not. A marriage that was not made in heaven is not a marriage at all.” When I asked him to describe a marriage made in heaven and one not made in heaven, he replied, “A marriage of two Christians is made in heaven. A marriage of two persons who are not Christians, or when one mate is a Christian and the other is not, is not made in heaven.” This is false reasoning, for which, of course, there is no biblical basis. Marriage was instituted by God on earth, in the time of man's innocency before sin entered. After the resurrection of the body and in the world to come men “neither marry, nor are given in marriage” (Mark 12:25; Luke 20:35). Marriage is not a Christian institution. It is to be honored by all peoples (Hebrews 13:4). It has nothing to do with heaven; it is confined to earth.

Since becoming a Christian I have thanked the Lord on many occasions for providing the marriage relationship. God gave to me a wonderful Christian wife, and with the passing of time I have a growing appreciation for God's provision for me. My wife is all to me that God intended she should be, “an help meet” (Genesis 2:18). The woman is to be a “help” to her husband. Every man needs that “help” that his wife only can provide. When God formed the first woman He did so by means of a surgical process. He removed a rib from Adam, and from that rib He built the first woman (Genesis 2:21-23). After God removed the rib from Adam, the man was no longer complete in himself. The woman whom God made from man's rib is needed to complete the man. Apart from my salvation in Jesus Christ, the most beautiful gift and the most satisfying provision God has made for me is my wife.

The Preparation
for the Marriage Relationship

At this point in our deliberations, let me address myself to those unmarried persons who are looking ahead to marriage. After a person has decided to receive Jesus Christ, the greatest decision ever to be faced in life is the selection of a lifetime partner, a husband or a wife. I cannot stress too strongly that the choice of your mate in marriage is of the gravest concern. No Christian should ever attempt marriage without prayer and a thorough search of the Scriptures. Thirty-five years in the Christian ministry have opened many doors of opportunity for marriage counseling, and I am prepared to say that many married persons who came to me seeking help were no more prepared for marriage on their wedding day than they were as little children playing with their toys. The only claim some brides and grooms have to maturity at their marriage is physical maturity. What difficulties many married couples have suffered because they were unprepared for marriage! Here are some precautionary steps one should consider before marriage.

The First Precaution

A Christian should never, under any circumstances, marry an unsaved person. The Bible forbids a believer in Christ to consider marriage with an unbeliever. Mixed marriages are never countenanced by God in either the Old Testament or the New. No two persons can live in harmony except they are in agreement on life's most important choice (See Amos 3:3). If the one person has received Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, and the other has rejected Him, there is no common ground on which to start a marriage. The Bible warns, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” (II Corinthians 6:14). This is a solemn command with which there can be no compromise. People with serious marital problems have complained frequently to marriage counselors that they have little or nothing in common. This has caused the breakdown of many marriages. Well then, how can there possibly be a successful marriage if both the man and woman cannot share their common faith in the Lord Jesus Christ?

The Christian stands in a totally different relationship to God than does the non-Christian. In Old Testament times the principle of separation was in force, for we read “. . . The Lord doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel” (Exodus 11:7). Woe be to the man or woman who fails to put a difference where God has put one! If the principle of separation applies in business and social life, how much more emphatically does it apply in the most intimate relationship of life, that of marriage! As a minister of the Gospel I am committed to the biblical principle of never knowingly performing a marriage ceremony for two people unless both are committed Christians through personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The mere thought of two persons being united in life, but separated throughout eternity, is well-nigh unbearable.

Early in my ministerial career a young Christian woman asked me to officiate at her marriage. Her fianc was an unbeliever. Moreover, he refused to discuss with anyone the question of salvation and his relation to Jesus Christ. When I told her that I could not become involved in such an unscriptural alliance, she angrily said, “But I love him. What do you expect me to do?” I told her that being in love may be a good reason for getting married, but that it is not always a valid one. Now it goes without saying that we should not marry a person whom we do not love. But it is possible to fall in love with someone most unsuitable according to God's standards. It is also possible to be madly in love with somebody one day, and not feel the same about that same person six months later. Being in love is essential to a happy marriage, but any one of us could fall in love with the wrong person. Love is not the sole basis for marriage. Christian, take care! A mismated alliance in friendship can lead to a mismated alliance in love, and this in turn could lead to a mismated alliance in marriage which could end in disaster.

The Second Precaution

A Christian should not marry merely for sexual gratification. The marriages that are based on sex alone are not happy marriages. Young people in their teens should heed this counsel. In a normal person the psychic energy usually associated with the sexual instinct moves in cycles. It strikes first when we are in our teens, and at such an early age no person is mature enough to assume the responsibilities of marriage. Those first sex drives create a difficult and dangerous time for young people. It is an easy matter for any teen-ager to be carried away by an infatuation for a person of the opposite sex. Too often such an unreasoning and uncontrolled passion has been mistaken for love, and this in turn has resulted in broken marriages.

Now let me speak frankly about this matter of sex. It is wrong to say that sex per se is sinful. Though the word sex does not appear in the Bible, the idea is found throughout the Scriptures. It means either of the two divisions of organisms distinguished as male and female, and this includes the attraction of one sex for the other. The attraction of male for female, and vice versa, is a natural one. Let me add that it is an unnatural condition when this attraction does not exist. A person does not become more spiritual by disassociating himself from the body. The sex urge is a normal function of the body. This is the way God made us. And God has given to us a frank and fearless discussion of sex in His Word. We need to examine the Scriptures prayerfully on the subject of sex, for in them we will find God speaking to us in a way that will prevent demoralization and degeneration. To know the facts and functions of sex is not enough. The knowledge we receive must be linked with our reverence and love for God.

The Bible says, “Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge” (Hebrews 13:4). The sexual relation between husband and wife is a beautiful and meaningful experience. It should be a mutually delightful experience for both. Some of the most spiritual people I have known were happily married couples who had children of their own. The sexual relation between husband and wife is an essential one in marriage. Sex without love will end with misery, but sex with love will result in much happiness. Now I am not suggesting that a successful marriage is based purely on a biological and sexual performance, but I am saying that the sex urge is normal and the marriage bed is the one place God has provided to satisfy that urge. There is still some of the old nonsense being passed along to girls that sex is for men only, and that the wifely duty is to submit to the cross of sex. I somehow feel that mothers who are guilty of passing along such distortions to their daughters are women who were frustrated in their own sex lives, and so take advantage of every opportunity to vent their hatred on men.

If you want to prepare yourself for a lasting and happy marriage, take a wholesome view of sex. Keep yourself pure for your life-partner. Remember God will judge the immoral and adulterous person. The Seventh Commandment says, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14), a law God has never rescinded. Adulterers shall not inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinthians 6:9), but they will be judged by God (Hebrews 13:4). Paul admonished Timothy, “Keep yourself pure” (I Timothy 5:22).

The Third Precaution

Do not decide upon marriage as an escape from pressure. A young Christian wife who had been married four years came to me seeking counsel. She was brief in her remarks and to the point. “I believe I made the biggest mistake of my life,” she said as she wept. There was hesitation. Then she continued, “I believe I married the wrong man.” She and the young man she married both were Christians. I had officiated at their lovely wedding four years earlier. She was old enough to be married at 23, and she and Harold seemed to enjoy eleven months of courtship, and now four years to the month from her wedding day she tells me she made a mistake. “Why did you marry Harold?” I asked her. She gave me two reasons why she hastily accepted his proposal. At the office where she was employed dishonesty was a common practice among the firm's management; the office was always polluted with cigarette smoke; drinking alcoholic beverages was routine; and married men dated single girls. That situation brought on pressure from which she sought an escape.

Now she might have looked for another job, but an unhappy situation at home only added to the pressure. Her father was an alcoholic who abused her mother and her. So in order to escape a difficult home life and undesirable working conditions she jumped at the opportunity when Harold proposed marriage. She felt that she might not have another opportunity to get married. She failed to face the problems and pressures at home and the office as she should have done. She should have come for counsel before she became involved with Harold. Beware of marrying in haste. Marriage is for life!

The Purpose
for the Marriage Relationship

In the God-planned life there is purpose behind the institution of marriage. If you are going to have a happy marriage you should know the purposes and their meaning.

Marriage Provides a New Partnership

The marriage of a man and woman marks a new and exciting union, a partnership for our stay on earth. Before marriage we share life with our family, mother, father, sister or brother; then we find companionship with playmates. But at the time of puberty (which is the state of physical development when it is possible to beget or bear children) we instinctively are drawn to the opposite sex. This is the normal and natural process; it is the way God intended it to be. During these adolescent years we begin to think about marriage. But too often no thought is given to God's purpose for this new relationship.

The Apostle Peter tells us that the husband and wife are “heirs together of the grace of life” (I Peter 3:7). The word “grace” suggests the idea of a gift. The term “heirs together” tells us that God has given to the husband and wife the privilege of sharing together their precious gift. Each is God's gift to the other as the new partnership is formed. God said, “They shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). Whatever else it is for, marriage is a partnership in which the two become one. This is the biblical view of marriage. This mutual relationship results in mutual fellowship, whether in joy or in sorrow. Where there is a mutual interest in glorifying God, life's burdens become lighter.

In this God-planned partnership there must be mutual trust and respect between both partners. Be honest with each other. Level with one another. Talk together and pray together. Don't keep secrets. Share your feelings in love and confidence. You are lifetime partners. Don't be jealous or suspicious of your partner.

Marriage Provides a New Pleasure

Since God provided for the marriage relationship it is His desire that both husband and wife find pleasure in it. “A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband . . . ” (Proverbs 12:4). “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the Lord” (Proverbs 18:22). “Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth” (Proverbs 5:18).

Now I am not suggesting that the unmarried do not find pleasure in life. But there is that added pleasure in the marriage partnership which the single person does not enjoy. That missing something in Adam's life was provided by God through the wife He gave to Adam.

There is pleasure in both giving and receiving love. Every person wants somebody to love, and every person wants to be loved. But the greatest satisfaction in loving is knowing that the love we give is adding joy and blessing to the one whom we love. True love is unselfish. It does not love in order to be loved. God Himself is the perfect example of love. “Herein is love, not that we love God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (I John 4:10). “The Son of God . . . loved me and gave Himself for me” (Galatians 2:20). Even though the husband is commanded to love his wife (Ephesians 5:25), and the wife her husband (Titus 2:4), each knows that obedience to this command adds pleasure to the marriage relationship. I always enjoy reading the testimony written of Jacob which says, “And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her” (Genesis 29:20).

Then there is that pleasure derived from the marriage act, the physical and sexual union of husband and wife. When either partner does not find that mutual harmony and delight in the marriage act, something is definitely wrong. Some young women have gone to the marriage altar with a fear of sex. I can recall a counseling session I had with one married couple. The wife had been reared in a Christian home where modesty was taught and practiced. This is good. However, the standard of modesty she was used to included the idea that the sex organs were the “bad” parts of the body. This is bad. God made all of the human body so that every part is good when used in the way He intended. The marriage act is good and it was designed by God for the pleasure of both husband and wife. After God created the first male and female He said, “Be fruitful, and multiply” (Genesis 1:28). Happy is the married couple who find mutual pleasure and satisfaction in the marriage act.

Marriage is for Parenthood

When God viewed His completed creation, He stated to our first parents that they were to be fruitful and multiply. This He told them before ever sin had entered. Sex per se is not associated with sin. It was God's way of insuring the continuity of the race. Every Christian should take the biblical view of marriage, regarding children as the desired result of the marriage union. “Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them . . . ” (Psalm 127:3-5). God considers children begotten in marriage to be a blessing.

In Old Testament times any failure to bear children was looked upon as a sure sign of God's disfavor. In a family where no children were born the husband and wife would come together to God in prayer. This was the experience of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Manoah and others. When God said to our first parents, “Be fruitful, and multiply,” He issued a command. Had Adam and Eve disobeyed God, their disobedience would have meant the death of the human race. In the heart of every normal wife is the desire of motherhood. That desire was put there by God. Marriage is for partnership and pleasure, but it is for parenthood also.

Recently I listened to a spokesman for the Woman's Liberation Movement. Among the crude and undignified statements she made, this one I remembered--“Man is wrong if he expects the woman to be a baby factory.” This deluded woman was twice divorced and had lost a legal battle to gain custody of her children. Having failed in two attempts in marriage, she now vents her hatred on all men. This poor frustrated woman failed to fulfill successfully a major role for which God created her, namely, motherhood. Her warped idea about the woman being a “baby factory” displayed her ignorance of God's Word and a total lack in Christian experience. If all women were as mixed up as she, the noble men and women who have made the most valuable contributions to mankind never would have been born.

If your marriage begins on a Christian basis, you are indeed fortunate. But this does not mean that there will always be perfect agreement in all matters. One couple who came to me for counsel were in disagreement as to the size their family should be. They were united in wanting to make a happy Christian home. But after the arrival of their first baby, they encountered their first major disagreement.

When Thomas, Jr. was four months old, Marion and Tom were having dinner together in their favorite restaurant, a treat enjoyed on an average of once a month. During the meal Marion said, “I would like our next child to be a girl.”

After some hesitation Tom replied, “As far as I'm concerned there won't be another child.”

Marion's evening was ruined. She could not eat the food on her plate. She was in tears as they drove home together. Tom tried to explain that his love for her and his desire to enjoy the marriage act had not diminished.

“We just can't afford another child,” he told her.

Their problem is not uncommon. How large a family should a married couple have? There is no arbitrary number that will suit every case. Any number of factors can contribute to a couple making the right decision. Health must be taken into consideration. I recall one case in Pennsylvania. After the first baby was born, the mother suffered a physical malady for which there was no known cure. The family doctor advised the wife and her husband that to have any more children would be unwise. The husband ignored the advice. They had a total of nine children in fourteen years. Five of the children were born with their mother's physical disability. The mother died three days after the birth of the ninth child. That husband failed to follow the simple rules of hygiene and common sense. Moreover, he sinned in failing to practice self-control.

The above case is no doubt an extreme one, but it should serve as a warning to every one of us. The husband who loves his wife dearly will be considerate of her. There will be times when he will have to control his sex desires in preference to the well-being of his wife. And let me add here that the same principle applies to the wife.

The late Dr. M. R. DeHaan, a successful physician and able teacher of the Bible said, “The number of children in a family can be controlled by observing the simple rules of hygiene and self-control as set forth in Leviticus 15:19-29 and 18:19. Observance of these instructions will result in God-planned families and the spacing of the birth of children from three to four years apart. According to the Bible, abstinence is commanded during and for seven days after the monthly cycle ends. This is God's method of birth control. The only method of birth control in Scripture is self-control. If you are willing to follow God's commandment to replenish the earth, and to follow the rules of cleansing which He Himself has laid down in the Scriptures, I believe that your family will be according to God's ordering, for His glory and for your joy.”

The Perils
in the Marriage Relationship

The Peril of Adjustment

In the marriage relationship there are some pitfalls to be avoided. One of these is in the matter of adjustment. There can be no harmony in a marriage when two people will not adjust to each other.

Some persons are not willing to adjust to someone else. This is especially so when one person has a selfish and stubborn personality.

During the courting period a man will work overtime at being a gallant gentleman. He sees to it that the lady in his life receives flowers, candy, and cards, always addressed “to the most beautiful girl in the world,” or “to the most important person in my life.” It is inherent in the male to give such flattery, and her inherent nature is to expect it.

The wedding day arrives. The honeymoon was everything each could expect. But now the husband and wife must settle down to the routine of making a living and living a life. The whole pattern of life changes.

He comes home from his work tired and under pressure. Problems in the office made his day a difficult one. He does not notice that she changed her hair style, or that she is wearing the new dress she finished making that day. She is quick to tell him where he failed. And now “the honeymoon is over.” Why? There has been no experience in the matter of adjustment. The problem met with strong emotional response.

Adjustments in marriage take time. I learned this through my own marriage experience. It is dangerous for either mate to take any hasty action that might break up the marriage. Time is needed to discuss and work out the problem. Very often the whole personality of a person is not revealed during the period of courtship. Certain childhood attitudes and actions are sometimes subdued during the courting days. The whole personality is disclosed when trials and disappointments come.

The real answer to the problem of adjustment is spiritual in nature. Jesus Christ makes the difference. He can maintain harmony in the home if both husband and wife will surrender their will to Him. Where His presence and power are felt, the problem of adjustment is solved.

The Peril of Acceptance

A second peril has to do with acceptance. For example, when a weakness in the wife shows itself, too often the husband is not willing to accept the flaw as a part of the girl he married. Or, put the shoe on the other foot, and you have the wife who refuses to accept the weak side of her husband's personality. And here is where the conflict begins.

To avoid this pitfall I will suggest one thing you ought not to do. Do not set yourself to the impossible task of trying to change your mate's personality. You will never succeed in this. I am what I am. I did not choose my personality. It came with the little bundle born into this world on November 29th, 1911. I am not responsible for my heredity nor my environment. So my wife had to accept me for what I am. And I accepted her for what she is. Now I didn't accept her fully during those first years of our married life. I felt then that I could change her, and at times I insisted that she change. I felt that in one or two things she could improve. I knew I was right. So I refused to give up until I succeeded. Why should I accept something I don't approve.

But the real problem was with myself. The little trait, or idiosyncrasy which irked me, was a part of my wife's personality. But I couldn't accept it. Actually it was not what she did that upset me as much as it was my immature reaction to what she did. It took some growing up on my part to learn how to accept her whole personality. Had she been as slow as I in catching on, we could have had some real problems.

The Peril of Affluence

And now I must add this word about the peril of affluence. During the past twenty-five years our society has become affluent. Money has flowed freely, and this has made it possible for Americans to have an abundance of things. It is common for a newly married couple to start out in a new house with every electrical appliance and luxury plus a new automobile, and be in debt for almost the total amount. This is not wise.

If you want a happy marriage, make up your minds that you are going to live within your means. Many marriages have been broken over financial matters. The wife must make up her mind that she will be satisfied with what her husband can provide. The Bible says, “Be content with such things as ye have” (Hebrews 13:5); “Beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth” (Luke 12:1). “Godliness with contentment is great gain” (I Timothy 6:6).

Money and things do not make for happiness. Mrs. Strauss and I have never been in debt. When we were married in 1931 we had $65.00 between us. But we were thankful for what we had. Together we trusted God. Not once in all these years has God failed to supply our needs. We never quarreled about money, but we were happy with each other. We owe it all to the fact that we put Christ first, and to Him we give all the glory.

The Peril of Abortion

Abortion is the removal of a human fetus from the uterus prematurely, thereby destroying the life of that fetus. It is not the natural miscarriage in pregnancy where the embryo dies followed by a spontaneous abortion, but the deliberate destruction of life by physical or chemical means.

As I understand the Bible, there is no mention of the therapeutic abortion, therefore there is no law which provides any sanction for such an act. The Scriptures view conception as a gift from God. When Eve conceived and bare Cain, she considered that conception to be of God (Genesis 4:1). All four sons that Leah bore were looked upon as gifts of God (Genesis 29:31-35). After Boaz married Ruth they entered into the marriage act, and the Scripture says, “The LORD gave her conception” (Ruth 4:13). David wrote by inspiration, “Thou has covered me in my mother's womb” (Psalm 139:13). God said to Jeremiah, “Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5). The Apostle Paul wrote, “It pleased God, Who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by His grace” (Galatians 1:15).

All of these passages teach us of the sovereign power and purposes of God in conception and embryological development. When man intervenes by destroying the embryo that is conceived, he interferes with the only Creator of all life. Only God can produce life, and He only must determine how and when that life should terminate.

Christian couples must be guided by the standards in God's Word. Any failure to do so may lead to disastrous results. We Christians have no right to permit the killing of the unborn children God has given to us.

The Permanency
of the Marriage Relationship

The Bible is clear in its teaching that the marriage relationship is a permanent one. I have never read one verse in the Bible where God approved divorce. The whole idea of divorce is diametrically opposed to the marriage plan as it was instituted by God. From the very beginning God intended one man for one woman and no more. Marriage is for life. Divorce is one of society's serious crimes. Every Christian who wants God's will for his or her life must settle this issue at once. I have made it clear in all of my premarital counseling that any person contemplating marriage should accept what God says about the permanency of marriage or else remain unmarried. The person who utters the solemn vow, “Till death do us part,” and contemplates the possibility of the divorce court if the marriage does not succeed, is a liar and a hypocrite. Remember, God holds the marriage contract.

The Lord Jesus Christ could not be in disagreement with His Father's ruling on the permanency of marriage. He said, “Have ye not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19:4-6; Mark 10:6-9 cf. Genesis 2:24). Please note that it is “What God hath joined together,” not “Whom God hath joined together.” The emphasis is upon the institution of marriage, not upon a certain class of persons coming to be married. The rule of permanency is binding upon all married persons. Marriage is a civil institution, that is, the rules apply to all civilization. When Moses wrote “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife,” God most assuredly knew that Adam's posterity would be fallen sinners. When the statement was given there were no fathers and mothers. God is the Author of civil and moral law as well as spiritual law. The marriage relation supersedes the relation of the child to the parents. The man must cleave to his wife for life.

If you want a happy marriage, abide by God's rules and shun the demon of divorce. Beware of all teaching and teachers, whether in or out of the organized church, which speak of “scriptural grounds for divorce.” Such “grounds” are based on a single parenthetical phrase, “except it be for fornication” (Matthew 5:32; 19:9). In the entire context in which the parenthesis appears, our Lord is teaching the permanency, or indissolubility of the marriage relation.

Recently I read again Malachi 2:11-16. I am convinced that the prophet was strongly persuaded that God was not hearing the prayers of His people because of the multiple divorces in Israel at that time. What Malachi wrote indicates clearly that God hates divorce.

Now does the parenthesis, “except it be for fornication” change the teaching in the entire context? Of course not! I have examined several English standard dictionaries, and they all make the clear distinction between the words “fornication” and “adultery.” These two words are not used interchangeably because they are not synonymous in their meanings. The word “fornication” (Gr. porneia) means “illicit sexual intercourse of unmarried persons.” The word “adultery” (Gr. Moikeia) means “illicit sexual intercourse of two persons when either is married to a third person.” In the exception clause our Lord used the word “fornication.” The word He used had not lost its meaning, and we may be certain He expressed Himself clearly. The exception clause is not dealing with the sin of married persons.

Why then did Christ use the word “fornication” of that sin of which a “wife” can be guilty? A wife in the Orient was so called when the betrothal or engagement was announced. This is evidenced in Matthew 1:19 where we read, “Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.” Actually he was not her husband by the standards of our western civilization because there had not been the consummation of the civil ceremony nor the marriage act. Mary's pregnancy was looked upon (by those who did not know the truth) as the result of fornication, not adultery. In verse 20 the angel added, “Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife.” According to our Western usage of the word “wife” she was not yet Joseph's wife, but by the custom of the Jews, a betrothed girl was called a wife. (See Deuteronomy 22:23-24.) Joseph accepted the testimony of the angel, believing that Mary had not committed fornication. Our Lord's enemies would not believe the truth about his supernatural and miraculous conception, and so they taunted Him with the innuendo, “We be not born of fornication” (John 8:41). The parenthetical phrase, “except it be for fornication” does not fit the case of married persons. Our Lord is merely saying that sexual unfaithfulness on the part of either party involved in a betrothal agreement, allows for the breaking of that contract. God's rule that marriage is for life has never been annulled.

Listen again to Christ speaking. “Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery” (Luke 16:18). This verse might appear to be disconnected from the rest of the passage, but actually it is an essential part of the context. The Pharisees had derided Christ for His teaching in the parable in verses 1-12. While they were legalistic in their demands upon others, insisting that Moses' laws be obeyed, they were guilty of breaking those same laws . . .

In answering their ridicule, Christ said, “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the Kingdom of God is preached . . .” (vs. 16). He defends the law of Moses in verse 17, and immediately follows with His “Kingdom of God” teaching about marriage. The marriage rule in verse 18 preceded and superseded the Law of Moses. This is God's rule for His people.

Now examine our Lord's words in Mark 10:11,12. “And He saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.” In both the Mark and Luke passages there is not the “exception” clause. The word “adultery” is used, The message is unmistakably clear. The demon of divorce is condemned.

In conclusion there is one more passage we should consider. It is one that has been used to justify divorce and remarriage. “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace” (I Corinthians 7:15). It appears from verse 12 that Paul is speaking of a marriage involving a believer and an unbeliever. Not that there had been an unequal yoke at the time of marriage, but a case where one had been converted to Christ after marriage and the other had not. Such a case would not be uncommon. Nor would it be uncommon for the unsaved partner to oppose his or her spouse and separate. In such instances the believer is not to oppose the departure of the unbeliever. Then follows the statement, “A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases.”

This statement that “a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases” has been made the basis of the argument in favor of divorce and remarriage. But it is unsound exegesis that arrives at this false conclusion. Verses 10 and 11 in the context say, “Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried.” Now is there contradiction in the context of this passage in I Corinthians 7? Of course not! The fault does not lie in the Scripture but with those of us who interpret the Scriptures.

Does the statement in verse 15, “a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases” teach divorce and remarriage? Some say, Yes! But does it? The Greek word translated “bondage” is doulouo means to serve as a slave. The verse is saying that if the unbelieving partner separates, the believer is not under obligation to the departing unbeliever. There is no responsibility in matters of servitude. A sound exegesis eliminates any reference to the basic marriage relationship.

Now to the proof! In verse 27 we read, “Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed . . .” Here the word “bound” is the Greek word desmeuo, the term Paul used when referring to the marriage relationship. He used the same word when speaking about the permanency of marriage in Romans 7, “For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth . . .” (Romans 7:2). If Paul had reference to marriage in I Corinthians 7:15 he unquestionably would have used this word. Most certainly he is not allowing for marriage and divorce. Those who teach that he is are in error both contextually and exegetically.

The full truth on any subject cannot be gathered from an isolated passage, but rather from the cumulative revelation of all the Scriptures which deal with the same truth. If we had only Matthew 5:31, 32, and Matthew 19:11, the champions of divorce and remarriage might have some grounds upon which to stand. But when all of the New Testament passages on marriage and divorce are considered, the total cumulative revelation will show that remarriage of divorced persons for any reason the divorce might have been obtained, is not sanctioned by God but constitutes adultery in His sight.

The bond formed in the marriage union is a permanent one. Divorce and remarriage never were a part of God's plan for mankind. You can have a happy marriage if you follow the rules in God's Book.

Related Topics: Marriage, Cultural Issues

Before you read "Confident Children..."

You should know that I really wanted to wait until all our children were grown before I wrote this book. Maybe then (if they all turn out well) you would view me as an expert on the subject of child rearing. But I decided I could not wait that long. I need this book now. You see, this is an examination and explanation of another book, the best one ever written on the subject of raising children, God’s Guidebook for Child Rearing, the Bible.

When I began this study each of our four sons was on a different educational level--one in college, one in high school, one in junior high, and one in elementary school. My wife and I began to realize how rapidly time flies and how little we have left in which to influence their lives. We decided that we need a more thorough understanding and a more consistent application of God’s rules for successful child rearing now so that our kids will turn out right. And so this book! The study has made a tremendous difference in our home life. It is our prayer that it will be every bit as helpful to yours.

But I must be quick to add, we are a long way from being perfect. And reading this book isn’t going to transform you into a perfect parent overnight either. God’s principles must be put into practice. As we come into an understanding of his Word we must obey it, and this will require some changes in our way of thinking and way of living. As the Lord shows you things that need to be changed, jot them down. Ask him to give you the commitment and the courage to do something about them. You will be tempted to continue to do things the same way you have always done them. It’s the easiest way to go. It takes a deep desire and dogged determination to change. But God is in the business of building that kind of motivation into the lives of those who want it and seek it. “For God is at work within you, helping you want to obey him, and then helping you do what he wants” (Phil. 2:13, TLB).

That presupposes, of course, that the Spirit of the living Christ does dwell in your life. The Bible says he lives in the life of every true Christian, you know. “And remember that if anyone doesn’t have the Spirit of Christ living in him, he is not a Christian at all” (Rom. 8:9b, TLB). This is a book for Christian parents who want to establish a truly Christian home.

Maybe that term “Christian home” demands a word of explanation. It isn’t necessarily a home where a picture of Jesus hangs on the wall and a family Bible lies on the coffee table. It isn’t even a home where grace is always said before meals and the family members attend church regularly, as valuable as those things are. It is a home where folks have acknowledged their sinfulness and have trusted the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior from the guilt and penalty of sin. Or as Jesus put it, they have been born again (John 3:3, 7). They have received the gift of eternal life by faith in him (John 3:16), and the love of God now fills and remodels their lives (Rom. 5:5).

For Christian parents seeking to establish a Christian home, divine direction and supernatural help are available. The Bible provides the guidance and the Holy Spirit supplies the strength. If our minds are open to his Word and our wills are submissive to his control, there are joyous days ahead for our families. So if these issues are settled, we’re ready to get on with our study.

Appendix for the Larger Semantic Units of Galatians

Chart I
Outline of the Hierarchy of Semantic Structure

Chart II
Schematic Diagram of Relations Between Propositions

Addition Relations (Developmental)

SEQUENCE--one proposition follows another in the referential world.

SIMULTANEOUS--Partial or complete overlap in time.

ALTERNATIVE--either contrastive choices or a series of choices within the same domain.

CONVERSATIONAL EXCHANGES--two halves of a conversation.

MATCHED SUPPORT--two propositions have the same relationship to another proposition they support.

Associative Relations Support

MANNER--tells how an event took place.

COMPARISON--similes, metaphors, examples.

CONTRAST--negation of the same predicate, or synonyms; or by antonyms; or by difference of degree.

EQUIVALENCE--synonyms or negated antonyms.

GENERIC-SPECIFIC--the generic includes the specifics.

AMPLIFICATION-CONTRACTION/SUMMARY--more information, summary statement, tag question, or rhetorical question and its answer.

REASON-RESULT--tells why this result.

MEANS-RESULT--tells how did this result come about.

MEANS-PURPOSE--tells what action was undertaken to achieve the desired result.

CONDITION-CONSEQUENCE--"if-then" relationship.

CONCESSION-CONTRAEXPECTATION--tells why the actual result is unexpected.

GROUNDS-CONCLUSION--tells what facts this conclusion is based upon.

TIME--tells when as event took place.

LOCATION--tells where an event took place.

CIRCUMSTANCE--tells "what else" happened, gives background information.

IDENTIFICATION--singles out a Thing (surface form is usually a restrictive relative clause).

COMMENT--gives information about a Thing (surface form is usually a non-restrictive relative clause).

CONTENT--answers "what?" (For example, "I heard--that you were here.")

Chart III
Procedure for Discourse Analysis

1. Look for probable boundaries between units of paragraph and above.

a. Note the grammatical and lexical characteristics of the words, phrase, or clauses which are paragraph initial in the paragraph as marked in:

the U.B.S. Greek text

Selected versions

Selected commentaries.

b. Note and list grammatical features which occur frequently at the beginning of a posited paragraph. This includes items such as vocatives, imperatives, interjections, rhetorical questions, genitive absolutes, and so on. State why some are probably not indicating a paragraph and others are.

2. Look for unity-coherence spans (shared grammatical and lexical information).

Lexical

a. The concordance can help here and perhaps the computer Bible. Look for key content words which are repeated (even if not in the exact grammatical form), more specifically, that are repeated in a given span of text. List.

b. The above should also be done for phrases and clauses List.

c. Look for words that are related semantically. List.

d. Look for parallelisms.

1) contrastive

2) serial

3) reciprocal.

e. Look for the "sandwich."

Grammatical

a. Continuation in many, several, or most main clauses of:

mood	object
tense	Person
subject	instrument and so on

b. A "sandwich" parallelism.

c. The ends of a chiasmus.

d. Serial (non-sandwich) parallelism.

3. Look for the differences between unity-coherence spans

a. Change in:

mood	subject
tense	time
person	location.

List.

b. Other grammatical features similar to those under 1.

c. New finite verb if other factors are also present.

d. Conjunctions which are primarily used initially in unit.

e. The start of close of a grammatical "sandwich."

Others are lexical

a. Tail-head words '

b. Change in semantic domain.

c. Start of close of a lexical "sandwich."

d. Higher level parallelisms (which because of length and other factors indicate sections).

e. A return to a non-subordinated, higher level proposition.

4. Combine the evidence of 1, 2, and 3 to posit more positive paragraph and section divisions. List.

5. Look for devices which show the prominence within each paragraph and perhaps larger units at the same time.

a. Finite verbs (non-subordinated)	g. Periphrastic repetitions
b. Forefronting	h. Lists
c. Repetitions	i. Litotes
d. Hendiadys	j. Hyperbole
e.Proportion (length)	k. Hypobole
f. Free pronouns	l. Chiastic focus.

Analyze propositionally, where necessary, in order to verify which are hi her ranked.

6. Distinguish between emphasis and focus where possible. Choose what is the main topic and what is the main comment in each paragraph. State evidence for our choice

7. State a tentative theme in the form of as simple a sentence as possible for each paragraph. Combine main topic and main comment. Give evidence showing this to be the focal part of the paragraph. (If in doubt, state only the topic of the paragraph.)

8. Posit relations between paragraphs. Discuss possible alternatives and the reasons for our choice.

9. Display the themes of each paragraph according to their dependency relationship with the dominant themes to the left and supporting themes arranged appropriately.

10. Group paragraphs into sections (if this has not already been done) and posit section themes. Revise where necessary to maintain logical sequence without forcing the data.

11. Display and indent subsection and section themes.

12. For difficult paragraphs and subsections, a full pro positional display will be necessary. In fact, to accomplish 5, 6, and 7, partial or complete propositional displays may be needed.

13. Distinguish, if not already done, between the larger components of the discourse, that is introduction, body, and conclusion.

14. Choose a theme for the whole book. Discuss and justify.

15. Write in draft form the discourse structure of the book.

16. Revise paragraph, subsection, section, and division displays. Also propositional displays where needed.

Support every decision from evidence found in the text

Chart IV
Some Factors Entering the Analysis of Pauline Epistles

Unity and coherence spans within semantic units

Boundary indicators separating semantic units

Devices to show prominence (emphasis, focus and theme)

Grammatical evidence

Same: mood, tense, subject, instrument, object.

A sandwich parallelism

Subordinators

Chiasmus (asyntactic device)

Conjunctions used medially in unit

Prepositions

Backward reference of relative clauses

Genitive constructions

Serial parallelism

Change in; mood, tense, subject, time, location

Rhetorical question

Vocatives

Start or close of grammatical sandwich

Conjunctions used initially in unit

Forward reference of relative clause

Nonsubordinated finite verbs

Relative clause in subject change

Finite verbs

Forefronting

Repetitions

Case Endings

Hendiadys

Nonsubordination

Proportion (length)

Chiasmus

Lexical Evidence

Repetition of key roots, words or phrases

Words in same semantic domain

Serial parallelism

Contrastive parallelism

Reciprocal parallelism

Parallelism of lists

Sandwich of lexical items/parallelism

Synonyms

Antonyms

Generic-specific terms

Tail-head pair of key words (hook-eye)

Change of semantic domain

Serial parallelism (sections)

Contrastive parallelism (sections)

Reciprocal parallelism (sections)

Parallelism of lists (sections)

Starting or closing a lexical sandwich

Free pronouns

Repetitions

Lists

Contrasts in degree

Hyperbole

Hypobole

Litotes

Sandwich focus

Chart V:
Comparison of Paragraph Divisions

		TLB	Phillips	RSV	TEV	NIV	Jerusalem	NASB	UBS	This Thesis
Chapter I	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
	13
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
Chapter II	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
	13
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
Chapter III	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
	13
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
	25
	26
	27
	28
	29

		TLB	Phillips	RSV	TEV	NIV	Jerusalem	NASB	UBS	This Thesis
Chapter IV	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
	13
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
	25
	26
	27
	28
	29
	30
	31
Chapter V	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
	13
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18
	19
	20
	21
	22
	23
	24
	25
	26
Chapter VI	1
	2
	3
	4
	5
	6
	7
	8
	9
	10
	11
	12
	13
	14
	15
	16
	17
	18

Related Topics: Introductions, Arguments, Outlines

An Introduction to the Book of Numbers

Related Media

I. TITLE:

A. The Hebrew title is Bemidbar or “In the Wilderness” (rbdmb) (of Sinai?)¹

B. The Greek title in the translation of the OT (LXX) was arithmoi (ARIQMOI) emphasizing the lists of numbers recorded in the book (1--4; 26)

C. The Latin Vulgate picked up on the Greek title and named the book Numeri from which the English acquires the name Numbers.
Milgrom suggests that the Greek and Vulgate titles, “are probably derived from the oldest Hebrew title homesh ha-pekudim ‘the fifth (of the Torah) the mustered’ (Mish. Yoma 7:1, Mish. Men. 4:3), so named because of the several censuses recorded in the book (chaps. 1-4,26).²

II. CHRONOLOGICAL SETTING:

A. The Passover occurred on the fourteenth day of the first month of the year and the nation departed from Egypt on the fifteenth day of the first month (Num 33:3; Ex 12:2, 6)

B. The tabernacle was erected at Mount Sinai exactly one year after the Exodus (on the first day of the first month of the second year; Ex 40:2, 17)

C. One month later the nation prepared to leave Sinai for the Promised Land (on the first day of the second month of the second year; Num 1:1)

D. On the twentieth day of the second month of the second year “the cloud was lifted from over the tabernacle of the testimony and the sons of Israel went out on their journeys from the wilderness of Sinai” (Num 10:11-12).

E. Deuteronomy opens with a reference to the first day of the eleventh month of the 40th year. This is 38 years, eight months and ten days after the nation departed from Sinai (Deut 1:3; cf. Num 10:11-12)Therefore, Numbers covers a period of time known as the wilderness wanderings which lasted 38 years, nine months and ten days.³

F. Hill and Walton offer the following timetable for events after the Exodus:⁴

Exodus from Egypt	15th day of 1st month	Exod. 12:2, 5; Num. 33:3
Arrival at Mount Sinai	1st day of 3d month	Exod. 19:1
Yahweh reveals himself at Sinai	3d day of 3d month	Exod. 19:16
Completion of tabernacle	1st day of 1st month of 2d year	Exod. 40:1, 16
Command to number Israel	1st day of 2d month of 2d year	Num. 1:1
Departure from Sinai	20th day of 2d month of 2d year	Num. 10:11
Arrival at Kadesh	1st month of 40th year?	Num. 20:1
Death of Miriam	1st month of 40th year?	Num. 20:1
Death of Aaron and thirty days of mourning	1st day of 5th month of 40th year	Num. 20:29
Departure for Moab	1st day of 6th month of 40th year?	Num 20:22; 21:4
Moses Addresses Israel in Moab	1st day of 11th month of 40th year	Deut. 1:2-3
Death of Moses and thirty days of mourning	?	Deut. 34:8
Joshua and Israel enter Canaan	10th day of 1st month of 41st year	Josh. 1:19

III. CRITICAL CONCERNS IN NUMBERS:

A. Mosaic Authorship: Although many critics questions Mosaic authorship of Numbers because of their view of sources in the book,⁵ it is better in view of they underlying assumptions of JEDP and the supporting historical evidence to give the book the benefit of the doubt and assume Mosaic authorship which was then edited at later times into its present canonical form⁶

B. Numbers in Numbers:

1. The design of the census in Numbers:⁷

a. To ascertain and recruit manpower for war (Num 1:3)

b. To allot work assignments in the forced labor gangs and the religious cult (Num 3:4)

c. To establish a basis for taxation (cf. Ex 30:11-16)

d. To order the Hebrew tribes in marching and camping formations (Num 2)

e. To contribute to the organization of former slaves into a unified people

2. Two census are taken in Numbers (1; 26):

a. The first census was taken in the second month of the second year after the Exodus (Num 1:1) numbering the first generation of post-Exodus Israelites

b. The second census was taken in the fortieth year after the Exodus numbering the second generation of post-Exodus Israelites (Num 20:1, 22-29; 33:38)

c. Both census were taken of Israelite men who were of fighting age (twenty years of age and older) Num 1:1-4; 26:1-4.

Census Figures in Numbers 1 and 26⁸

Tribe	Reference	Figures	Reference	Figures
Reuben	1:20-21	46,500	26:5-11	43,730
Simeon	1:22-23	59,300	26:12-14	22,200
Gad	1:24-25	45,650	26:15-18	40,500
Judah	1:26-27	74,600	26:19-22	76,500
Issachar	1:28-29	54,400	26:23-25	64,300
Zebulun	1:30-31	57,400	26:26-27	60,500
Ephraim	1:32-33	40,500	26:35-37	32,500
Manasseh	1:34-35	32,200	26:28-34	52,700
Benjamin	1:36-37	35,400	26:38-41	45,600
Dan	1:38-39	62,700	36:42-43	64,400
Asher	1:40-41	41,500	36:44-47	53,400
Naphatali	1:42-43	53,400	26:48-50	45,400
Totals		603,550		601,730
Average		50,296		50,144
High		74,600		76,500
Low		32,200		22,200

Greatest increase:	Manasseh (20,500)
Greatest decrease:	Simeon (37,100)

3. Significance of the Numbers in the Census:⁹

a. If one understands the numbers to be literal and the men to represent about one-fourth of the population, then the number of the Israelites ranges from two to three million people¹⁰

A literal understanding of the numbers in the census is in congruence with Pharaoh’s fear of the rapidly increasing Hebrews overrunning Egypt (Ex 1:7-12), the promises made to Abraham about becoming a great nation (Gen 12:2; 17:5-6), the earlier census taken during the first year in the wilderness (Exod 30:12--16; 38:26), and other traditions about the numbers of adult males who left Egypt (Ex 12:37; Num 11:21)¹¹

b. Some argue that the numbers cannot be literal for the following reasons:

1) The Sinai wilderness did not have the ability to sustain such a large number of people and animals

2) Israel was unable to subdue and displace the Canaanites

c. Other non-literal approaches have been suggested for the reading of the numbers in the census:

1) The census totals are misplaced census lists from the time of David

2) The census totals are part of the writer’s “epic prose” style intended to express the wholeness of Israel and the enormity of YHWH’s deliverance of the people (e.g., figurative)

3) The census totals are literary fiction and/or exaggerations corrupted by centuries of revising the Pentateuch

4) The Hebrew word for “thousands” from the lack of vowel markings in the writings and could be read as “clan,” “tribe,” or even unit” (cf. Judg 6:15; Zech 9:7) or even “chieftain” or “armed warrior” (e.g., Gen 36:15).
Hill and Walton write, “Hence the census lists of Numbers record either military ‘units” or an unspecified number of warriors or individual (armed) fighting men. Such accounting lowers the Israelites army to a figure somewhere between 18,000 and 100,000 men, with the total Hebrew population numbering between 72,000 and 400,000 people.
It is argued that these drastically reduces figures are more consistent with available historical and archaeological data regarding population patterns during the period of the Hebrew Exodus. this approach also corroborates the biblical affirmations about the size of Israel when compared with surrounding nations (cf. Deut 7:1-7; Exod 23:29)¹²

C. Culture in Ritual: It seems that the rituals described in Numbers are to be closely tied to an understanding of Israel’s culture and thus Israel herself.

1. Just as all cultures have rituals which are expressions of who they are (even if those rituals appear from the perspective of those doing them to be non-ritual), so is it that Israel’s rituals are expressions of who they are.

2. Wenham has offered suggested interpretations of ritual in Leviticus and Numbers based upon studies in anthropology which suggest very plausible means by which one might interpret Israel’s cultural ritual¹³

IV. STRUCTURE IN NUMBERS:¹⁴

A. The order (or disorder) of Numbers is often considered to be a difficulty for many in interpreting the book¹⁵

B. Wenham offers several suggestions for understanding the literary structure of this book:¹⁶

1. The mixture of law and narrative is designed to remind the readers that saving history concerns everyone and that now is when they must do the will of God

2. The inclusion of law with narrative is designed to emphasize promise in that Israel can fulfill it¹⁷

3. The rondo, or variation, form in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers emphasizes large cycles which bring out “the parallels between the three journeys, and between the three occasions of law-giving, at Sinai, Kadesh and the plains of Moab.”¹⁸ The following charts emphasize this¹⁹

Exodus to Numbers

Egypt (Ex 1--13), Sinai (Ex 19--Num 10), Kadesh (Num 13-20), Plains of Moab (Num 22-36)


Journeys
Red Seat to Sinai	Sinai to Kadesh	Kadesh to Moab
Led by cloud Ex 13:21	= Nu 10:11ff
Victory over Egypt 14		cf. 21:21-35
Victory song 15:1-18	cf 10:35f	21:14-15
Miriam 15:20-21	= 12	= 20:1
People complain 15:23-24	= 11:1	= 21:5
Moses’ intercession 15:25	= 11:2	= 21:7
Well 15:27		= 21:16
Mana and quails 16	= 11:4-5
Water from rock 17:1-7		= 20:2-13
Victory over Amalek 17:8-16		cf. 21:1-3
Jethro 18:1-12	cf. 10:29-32


Stops
Topic	Sinai	Kadesh	Moab
Divine promises	Ex 19:5-6; 23:23ff.	Nu 12:2	22:24
40 days	24:28	13:25	--
Rebellion	32:1-8	14:1ff	25:1-3
Moses’ intercession	32:11-13	14:13-19	--
Judgment	32:34	14:20-35	25:4
Plague	32:35	14:37	25:8-9
Law of sacrifice	34:18ff; Lv. 1-7 etc.	15:1-31	28-29
Trial	Lv.24:10-23	15:32-36	27:1-11
Rebellion against Priests	Lv. 10:1-3	16:1-35	--
Atonement through priests and Levites	Ex 32:26-29	16:36-50	25:7-13
Priestly prerogatives	Lv. 6-7; 22	17-18	31:28-30; 35:1-8
Impurity rules	Lv. 11-16; Nu.9:6-14	19	31:35-9ff.
Census	Nu. 1-4	--	26

V. PURPOSES OF THE BOOK OF NUMBERS:

A. To fill-in the historical period from the Exodus and Sinai revelation to the preparations in Moab to enter the Promised Land

B. To explain that the 38 year period in the wilderness was a consequence for the unbelief of the older generation (Dt 1:35ff)

C. To demonstrate God’s faithfulness and forbearance against the backdrop of Israel’s unfaithfulness, rebellion, apostasy and frustration²⁰

D. To present laws as case studies which do not have a precedent in what has been spoken thus far.²¹

E. To narrate the preparation of Israel for entry into the Promise Land²² by describing the journey from Sinai to the region beyond Jordan, and the legal decisions made in the wilderness²³

¹ Milgrom writes, It was also entitled va-yedabber after the first word (see Rashi on Exod. 38:26), as is the case with the other Torah books. The present Hebrew Title Bemidbar (the fifth word of the opening verse) seems more apt since it actually encompasses all the events described in the book that took place 'in the wilderness' (Leviticus, xi).

² Leviticus, xi.

³ La Sor et al write, No effort will be made to press these date formulas, for Numbers makes no theological significance of them other than a general reference to the 'forty years' in the wilderness (cf. 14:33f.). However, it is highly unlikely that they were mere fictions of postexilic editors. It is not unreasonable to suppose that in addition to the written log of the stages of the journeyings (33:2) Moses also kept a record of the dates--at least those preserved in the account (OTS, 163, n. 1).

⁴ SOT, 133.

⁵ La Sor et al,

⁶ After marshalling supporting evidence for an early Numbers Wenham writes, This evidence lends weight to the book's own testimony that the traditions on which it is based originated in the Mosaic period. How much expansion, revision and rewriting they underwent in the centuries before they reached their final form, possibly in the early days of the monarchy, is hard to determine by critical methods. It is perhaps fairer to give the tradition the benefit of the doubt, than to assume everything must be late unless there is evidence to the contrary. But precise dating of the material is largely irrelevant to exegesis, for it is the final form of the text that has canonical authority for the church ... (Numbers, 24-25).

Likewise, Hill and Walton write, The book itself contains only one reference to Moses as an author of the material, and that is specifically limited to the itinerary of the Israelites in their desert trek from Egypt to Moab (Num. 33:2). Elsewhere the text implies that priests were also recording and preserving the divine instruction and regulations, especially those pertinent to their duties associated with the tabernacle (cf. 5:23).

As with Leviticus, the introductory formula 'and the Lord said to Moses' pervades every chapter of the book. Until more solid evidence surfaces to the contrary, it may be assumed by analogy to the book of Exodus that the bulk of the text in Numbers is the literary product of Moses, stemming from the fifteenth or thirteenth century B. C. (depending on the date of the Hebrew Exodus).

However, the references to Moses in the third person in the narrative (e.g., Num 12:3; 15:22-23) and the sporadic editorial insertions designed to inform a later audience (e.g., 13:11, 22; 27:14; 31:53) suggest that the book took its final form sometime after the death of Moses. It seems correct to assume that the substantial portions of the history and legislation of Numbers originated with Moses during the thirty-eight years of desert wandering that the book recounts (cf. Num. 33:38; Deut. 1:3). Whether he transcribed the words of Yahweh himself or dictated them to a scribe is unclear. But Numbers and the rest of the Pentateuch were cast in the form of a unified, five-volume book sometime between the days of Joshua and the elders of Israel (Josh. 24:31) and the era of Samuel (cf. 1 Sam. 3:19-21) [Survey of the Old Testament, 130-31).

⁷ This following is adapted form Hill and Walton, SOT, 136.

⁸ This chart is adapted from the charts by Walton and Hill, SOT, 137; and La Sor et al, OTS, 167; Wenham, Numbers, 60.

⁹ For fuller discussions of this difficult matter see Wenham, Numbers, 60-66; Budd, Numbers, 6-9.

¹⁰ See also Wenham, Numbers, 59. This still seems like the best solution to this writer, even though it is not without difficulties.

¹¹ See Milgrom, Numbers, who himself concludes that At present, then, there is no choice but to assume that the number 600,000 was meant to be understood literally (p. 339; cf also pp. 336-38.

¹² Hill and Walton, SOT, 137. They offer no real solution to this difficulty, but unfortunately affirm that one's presuppositions determine one's conclusion, Yet it must be emphasized that none of the interpretive options for the Numbers census figures is without problems or inconsistencies. Generally speaking, one's view of Scripture determines a person's stance on the biblical numbers, with one end of the spectrum inclined toward literalness, and the other end skeptical about their historicity and reliability, and between them a moderate view of openness toward alternative readings (ibid.).

¹³ Gordon J. Wenham, Numbers: An Introduction and Commentary (Inter-Varsity Press, 1981), 25-39. An example of his discussion of an anthropologically-based approach to ritual symbolism is as follows: First, this approach seeks to understand the whole ritual system and not just parts of it, or more precisely to understand the parts in the light of the whole. This may be illustrated by Douglas' approach to the food laws. Earlier commentators picked on certain elements in the food laws as suggestive of a particular interpretation. For instance, sheep were clean because they reminded man of his divine shepherd, while serpents were unclean because they recalled the agent of the fall. But multitudes of animals in the list found no easy explanation of this type, for example, camels, eagles, grasshoppers, etc. Douglas drew attention to that feature of the list in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 that the biblical writers seem to concentrate on, namely the means of locomotion of the animals, how many feet and what type of feet they have. From surveying the lists as a whole she deduced that the animal world mirrors the human world. Just as there are three principal divisions among men, Gentiles, Jews, and priests, so there are three classes of animals: unclean, that may not be eaten; clean, i.e. edible; and sacrificial beasts. Her theory of correspondence between the human and the animal kingdoms is confirmed by other texts scattered throughout the Pentateuch.

Secondly, Soleer has independently arrived at a similar analysis of the food laws to that of Douglas. Indeed his study represents an advance on her work, showing that the correspondences between animals and men run even deeper than earlier realized. The birds listed as unclean are unclean, because they are birds of prey, i.e. eat flesh with blood in it, a mortal sin under Old Testament law (Lv. 17:10-14). It is the herbivorous land animals that are clean, and according to Genesis 9:3 (cf. 1:29f.) man too was vegetarian until after the flood. It is also worth noting that Carmichael, using more traditional methods of exegesis, has arrived at similar conclusions. He argues that in Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 22:110 the ox, the best of the sacrificial and clean animals, symbolizes Israel, while the ass, an unclean beast, pictures Canaan. This convergence of interpretation, based on several different methods of study, suggests that the symbolic dimensions of biblical thought are at last being understood.

Thirdly, this interpretation is corroborated in the earliest commentaries on these laws. For example, the second-century BC Letter of Aristeas sees the behaviour of clean animals as models for human conduct. Acts 10 links the preaching of Peter to the Gentiles with eating unclean animals. In other words, as soon as men of all nations could belong to the people of God, those food laws which had symbolized Israel's election of and served to separate her from the nations became irrelevant too (ibid., 33-34).

¹⁴ For a good discussion of the literary structure of particular units in Numbers see Migrom, Leviticus, xii-xxxi.

¹⁵ Martin North, Leviticus, 2.

¹⁶ Wenham, 14-18.

¹⁷ The clearest example of this is to be found in chapter 15, where the demand to offer grain, oil, and wine along with animal sacrifice is an implicit pledge that one day Israel will enter Canaan despite the events described in the previous chapters 13--14. The six laws about the land (22:50 to the end) similarly remind the reader that the promise is on the verge of fulfillment (Numbers, 15).

¹⁸ Wenham, Numbers, 16. In addition see Milgrom for a literary structure of the Hexateuch (Numbers, xiii-xxxi).

¹⁹ These are adapted from Wenham, Numbers, 16-17.

²⁰ The success of Israel in fulfilling her role as God's mediatorial agent to exercise God's rule on earth does not rest on her but on the One who chose her into that position. There is a certain irony in God's permissive will in that He allows evil to draw people closer to Him. Although sin appears to be allowed to interfere with what God is doing, it does not ultimately triumph. The question is not whether man can obey but whether man will obey (with the strength of the Lord).

As Johnson writes, Numbers continues to reveal YHWH in His Presence among the people who permits Israel's disobedience to delay entrance into the land promised yet in the discipline of His permissive will prepared the next generation to enter the land in obedience administered under the responsibility demanded by law (Synopsis of Numbers [unpublished class notes in 371 Seminar in the Pentateuch, Dallas Theological Seminary, Fall 1989], 1).

²¹ Although some of the didactic sections are parallel with Leviticus (e.g., the prescription concerning the seasonal feasts in 28; 29; cf. Lev 1--7; 23), much is unique to Numbers. Some of these prescriptions strongly anticipate the settlement of the Promised Land and thus affirm that Israel will enter and posses the land (the test of an unfaithful wife (5:11-31), supplementary offerings (15:1-21), tassels on one's garment (15:37-41), water of purification (19:1ff).

²² Budd writes, One of his [the author's] chief concerns is to establish principles of attitude and behavior which are a precondition of possession and enjoyment of the land (Numbers, xvii).

²³ Maryono writes, Moses also wanted Israel to learn from history. Together with describing in detail the great things God has done to and for them he also listed carefully various commands of God to govern their whole life. Their position as covenantal people obligates them to subject the whole area of their life under the control of God: worship, social, family, and individual. They are also to know that the land they will posses is a covenantal land. The Lord dwells in it, therefore, they are called to guard the purity of the land. Obedience to His commands will assure the possibility of enjoying the blessing in the land. Then Moses warns the people ... [that] grave consequences shall [occur if] they fail to obey God. Their covenantal position does not exclude them from the possibility of receiving server judgment (Petrus Maryono, The Synopsis of Numbers [paper submitted for course 371 Seminar in the Pentateuch, Dallas Theological Seminary, Fall 1989], 8).

Related Topics: Introductions, Arguments, Outlines

Select Bibliography for "How to Study the Bible"

Blomberg, Craig, Robert L. Hubbard, and Willam W. Klein. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Edited in consultation with Kermit A. Ecklebarger. Dallas: Word, 1993.

Silva, Moiss, gen. ed. Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation: Six Volumes in One. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1991.

Cottrell, Peter, and Max Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1989.

Carson, D. A. and John D. Woodbridge, eds. Scripture and Truth. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.

Virkler, Henry A. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981.

Fee, Gordon D., and Douglas Stuart. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982.

Jensen, Irving L. How to Profit from Bible Reading. Chicago: Moody, 1985.

Wald, Oletta. The Joy of Discovery in Bible Study. Rev. ed. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1975.

Hendricks, Howard G., and William D. Hendricks. Living by the Book. Chicago: Moody, 1991.

Robinson, Haddon W. Biblical Preaching: The Development and Delivery of Expository Messages. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980.

Sproul, R. C. Knowing Scripture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1977.

Traina, Robert A. Methodical Bible Study: A New Approach to Hermeneutics. New York: The Biblical Seminary, 1952.

Warren, Rick. Dynamic Bible Study Methods: 12 Approaches to Searching the Scriptures. Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1981.

Wilhoit, Jim and Leland Ryken, Effective Bible Teaching. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.

Willhite, Keith and Scott M. Gibson, eds. The Big Idea of Biblical Preaching. Connecting the Bible to People: In Honor of Haddon W. Robinson. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.

Español

Discipleship Tracks

Track System

The following two tracks are designed to aid the student in getting a better grasp on Scripture and the process of discipleship. A brief character sketch is given for each track in order to help you see where you “fit.” The key is: Know thyself! Having said this, however, since the topics are covered in greater detail in track two than they are in track one, make sure that you really do understand the topics in track one. In the long run, it wouldn’t hurt for a person to go through track one, even if they think they already understand these areas.

Track 1 (Carol)

Carol is a young Christian, or a Christian who has been orphaned (never been discipled or received any form of good teaching). Carol is hungry to grow. She is looking for someone to mentor her. She has been reading her Bible, but it seems so foreign. Carol needs to be grounded in some very basic things. First of all and most importantly, she needs to know who her “daddy” is and what he has done for her. She needs to develop a habit of meeting with her Father to get to know him. She needs to understand who she is in Christ. She needs to have someone lovingly help her expose patterns in her life reflecting her old way of life and show her that these have been broken. It is also critical at this point that Carol experience a loving community in which her spiritual gifts are exercised, she sees true worshippers and honest struggling but victorious Christians. Carol should not abandon her old friends (unless they are harmful to her) but instead should be joined by the Christian community so that she can share her new found love with them.

Overview of Track 1 Lessons:

The Mission: Discipleship—To Be One and to Make One
Knowing, Believing, and Sharing the Gospel
The Bible: God Has Spoken and He Has Not Stuttered
The Triune God: Who Is He?
Jesus: God Permanently Clothed in Humanity
The Holy Spirit: God with Us
Man and Sin: Who Are We? What Happened? What Is Our Destiny?
Salvation: What Is the Solution?
Christian Growth until Glorification: How Do I Love God in the Here and Now?
The Church: My New Community and Sphere of Service!
Angels: “Ministering Spirits”
Satan: Our Adversary
The End: Salvation, Judgment, and Rewards

Track 2 (John)

John is a growing Christian. He has been discipled perhaps a year. He understands the basic issues of his relationship with God and his position in Jesus Christ. He is beginning to experience victory over old habits. He has fallen in love with the church, but has not been dragged into a Christian ghetto leaving his unbelieving friends in the dust. Instead, he is actively involved with his old friends and has learned to build bridges in order to share his faith with them. John loves to worship God. He is consistently spending 15 minutes everyday reading the Bible and 10 minutes praying. John is still hungry to learn more about his God and to understand the Bible better. He hopes to become a leader in his cell church soon and will be starting as an intern. He is beginning to learn about his spiritual gifts and others in the church are encouraging him to exercise them.

Overview of Track 2 Lessons:

The Mission: Discipleship—“Takes One to Make One”
The Bible: God’s Living and Authoritative Word
New Testament Survey: Getting the “Big Picture”
Scripture Memory and Theology Plan: “Your Word Have I Hid in My Heart”
Theology Proper—The Study of God: His Character and Ways
Christ: His Person and His Work
The Spirit: Our Comforter and Enabler
Man, Sin, and Relationships: Who We Are. What’s the Problem? What’s the Solution?
Salvation: What Does It Mean To Be Restored to God?
Sanctification: Faith and Growth in the Christian Life
Satan: To Understand the Enemy and To Stand Firm against His Enemy
Ecclesiology: Understanding the Nature of God’s New Community
End Times: How is God Going to End All This?

Related Topics: Teaching the Bible, Discipleship

Português

Introduction to Discipleship Track 1

The Christian life is a life of discipleship. The contemporary call to discipleship is often spelled out in terms of rigor and self denial, and well it should be. After all, it was the Master himself who said, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself, take up his cross daily, and follow me” (Luke 9:23). The call to discipleship, then, involves a call to take up an instrument of death, the cross, and follow the master to Jerusalem, as it were.

But we must also note that the Master spoke about discipleship in other terms as well. On many occasions he used rural, agrarian imagery to envision for people a life of discipleship. Indeed, in Matthew 11:25-30 he spoke about discipleship as an invitation to rest, to take upon ourselves his yoke and learn from him.

The word “disciple” is the English term typically used to translate mathetes, which itself is an important Greek NT word often referring to a “student,” “pupil,” “apprentice,” or “adherent.” Generally speaking, when Jesus uses mathetes in the Gospels, it has connotations both of “learning” and “following.” Indeed, Jesus suggests that a committed disciple is one who reflects on His teachings and seeks to consistently implement them in his or her life (John 8:31-32). A disciple is also someone who, in light of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20), desires to help others come to know the Master and live out his teachings as well. Therefore, since discipleship is a good lens through which to view the whole of the obedient Christian life, we have decided to start this second track with another important article along these lines.

The goal of this first track, then, is to contribute to the discipleship process of a young believer by orienting them to the basic doctrines and ideas of the Christian faith. We will read articles on discipleship, the importance of the Bible, the triune God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, Man and Sin, Salvation, Christian growth, Satan, the church, and the end times. It should be mentioned that the articles used for the various tracks are culled from material already on the website. This means that we may use article 3 in a six-part serieses on prayer as one of our articles. We will attempt to indicate where this is the case so that the reader can look at the series as a whole if they so wish. Also, the articles were written by at least six different people, so the student is afforded a nice variety in perspective and writing style.

The way to use the material is straightforward and easy. First, read the synopsis of the article and then the article itself. The synopsis is designed to orient you to the lesson and should not be skipped. After reading the lesson and thinking about it, go ahead and answer the various questions assigned to that article. This may be done in a group or one your own.

For the most part, the questions are fairly straightforward, though they will require some thought. Do not be concerned if you cannot answer every question. Some will be straightforward “content” questions, some will be “synthetic” (or understanding) questions, and some will be “applicational” questions. Give it your best shot and enjoy the material. Our prayer is that the Lord will use this material to encourage you in a life of discipleship and that you, in turn, can minister to others, enabling them to live an obedient life for the Lord (John 14:21). Finally, any suggestions you have on how to improve the material would be greatly appreciated.

The Holy Spirit: God with Us

There is no little confusion these days over the person and work of the Holy Spirit. People are making all sorts of claims: some true and good, some heretical, and some downright ridiculous. There are numerous factors which give rise to such ideas, including a poorly interpreted, yet genuine movement of the Spirit, as well as the doctrinal problem of the “great divorce” between a Biblical understanding of creation and its counterpart, redemption. This divorce plagues evangelicalism like a wet blanket on a cold night.

Therefore, since a proper understanding of the Spirit is such a pressing need, we have decided to suggest two companion articles on the subject. You will want to study these articles well, taking sufficient time to digest the material. These articles are part of a series called, ABCs for Christian Growth. In particular they are part of the second section of the series called, “The Transformed Life.”

The Article: The Spirit-Filled Life (Part 1)

Synopsis

This article discusses the personality of the Spirit as evidenced in numerous Scriptural statements concerning the fact that he possesses a mind, emotions, and a will. He also performs actions consistent with genuine and full personality—actions such as leading, teaching, and convincing. He also receives ascriptions due only to a person, i.e., he can be obeyed, grieved, blasphemed, insulted or lied to. As a genuine person, then, he is to be distinguished from his power. He is not an it, some mindless force, so to speak, as certain people would have us believe.

But the Spirit is also fully divine, possessing all the attributes of deity in their infinite perfections. His attributes of omnipresence, omniscience, omnipotence prove that he is divine, along with the titles which are given to him, including “God.” His work of creating, redeeming, and sustaining all demonstrate his divinity. Believers need to understand these truths, coupled with the fact that his advent at Pentecost has inaugurated the long awaited age of the Spirit. We are now living in an age where the Spirit has taken up permanent residence in the heart of the believer. His primary purpose is to reveal Christ to us and keep us safe from the enemy until the day of our glorification.

Questions

1. Before you had read this lesson, what was your understanding of the personality of the Spirit? How has this lesson changed your views?

2. According to Ephesians 4:29-30 how do we grieve the Spirit? What are some other sins we commit against the Holy Spirit?

3. What is the primary role of the Spirit in your life? What other functions does he carry out?

4. How is the present age of the church, in which the Spirit indwells all believers permanently, different from the previous age described in the Old Testament?

5. On what basis was the Spirit given to you and how is this foundation unchangeable?

The Article: The Spirit-Filled Life (Part 2)

Synopsis

The article, The Spirit Filled Life (Part 2), carries on where the first article left off. It discusses the important distinctions between indwelling and filling so that the believer is not confused over these important issues. Confusion here can result in depression and discouragement since a person may not be sure if they possess the Spirit or not. But if you’ve trusted Christ alone, you possess the Spirit! The real question is not, “Do I possess the Spirit?” but “Do I understand some of the basics about how he works in my life?”

The article lays great stress on why it is important to walk by and be filled with the Spirit and the inevitable consequences of not living this way. Therefore, it is important that one learn how to be filled and how to walk by the Spirit. Though the Bible gives no set formula, per se, there is more than enough information in Scripture to determine what is generally meant by these two commands. This article is designed specifically to explore this issue.

Questions

1. What does it mean to be filled with the Holy Spirit?

2. What are some differences between the indwelling and filling of the Spirit?

3. What is the difference between “walking by” the Spirit and “being filled” with the Spirit?

4. Explain why it is vital to the Christian life to walk by and be filled with the Spirit.

5. Explain how to be filled with the Holy Spirit? How is that similar to or different from what you’ve heard before? Why do you think the Bible gives no set formula, only guidelines on this issue?

Scripture Memory Passages: John 16:13-14

Appendix 8: Soul Nourishment First

It has pleased the Lord to teach me a truth, the benefit of which I have not lost, for more than fourteen years. The point is this: I saw more clearly than ever that the first great and primary business to which I ought to attend every day was, to have my soul happy in the Lord. The first thing to be concerned about was not how much I might serve the Lord, or how I might glorify the Lord; but how I might get my soul into a happy state, and how my inner man might be nourished. For I might seek to set the truth before the unconverted, I might seek to benefit believers, I might seek to relieve the distressed, I might in other ways seek to behave myself as it becomes a child of God in this world; and yet, not being happy in the Lord, and not being nourished and strengthened in my inner man day by day, all this might not be attended to in a right spirit. Before this time my practice had been, at least for ten years previously, as an habitual thing, to give myself to prayer, after having dressed myself in the morning. Now, I saw that the most important thing I had to do was to give myself to the reading of the Word of God, and to meditation on it, that thus my heart might be comforted, encouraged, warned, reproved, instructed; and that thus, by means of the Word of God, while meditating on it, my heart might be brought into experiential communion with the Lord.

I began therefore to meditate on the New Testament from the beginning, early in the morning. The first thing I did, after having asked in a few words the Lord’s blessing upon his precious Word, was, to begin to meditate on the Word of God, searching as it were into every verse, to get blessing out of it; not for the sake of the public ministry of the Word, not for the sake of preaching on what I had meditated upon, but for the sake of obtaining food for my own soul. The result I have found to be almost invariably this, that after a very few minutes my soul has been led to confession, or to thanksgiving, or to intercession, or to supplication; so that, though I did not, as it were, give myself to prayer, but to meditation, yet it turned almost immediately more or less into prayer. When thus I have been for a while making confession or intercession, or supplication, or have given thanks, I go to the next words or verse, turning all, as I go on, into prayer for myself or others, as the Word may lead to it, but still continually keeping before me that food for my own soul is the object of my meditation. The result of this is, that there is always a good deal of confession, thanksgiving, supplication, or intercession mingled with my meditation, and then my inner man almost invariably is even sensibly nourished and strengthened, and that by breakfast time, with rare exceptions, I am in a peaceful if not happy state of heart. Thus also the Lord is pleased to communicate unto me that which, either very soon after or at a later time, I have found to become food for other believers, though it was not for the sake of the public ministry of the Word that I gave myself to meditation, but for the profit of my own inner man.

The difference, then, between my former practice and my present one is this: Formerly, when I rose, I began to pray as soon as possible, and generally spent all my time till breakfast in prayer, or almost all the time. At all events I almost invariably began with prayer, except when I felt my soul to be more than usually barren, in which case I read the Word of God for food, or for refreshment, or for a revival and renewal of my inner man, before I gave myself to prayer. But what was the result? I often spent a quarter of an hour, or half an hour, or even an hour, on my knees, before being conscious to myself of having derived comfort, encouragement, humbling of soul, etc., and often, after having suffered much from wandering of mind for the first ten minutes, or a quarter of an hour, or even half an hour, I only then began really to pray. I scarcely ever suffer now in this way. For my heart, first being nourished by the truth, being brought into experiential fellowship with God, I then speak to my Father and to my Friend (vile though I am, and unworthy of it) about the things that He has brought before me in His precious Word. It often now astonishes me that I did not sooner see this point. In no book did I ever read about it. No public ministry ever brought the matter before me. No private intercourse with a brother stirred me up to this matter. And yet, now, since God has taught me this point, it is as plain to me as anything, that the first thing the child of God has to do morning by morning is, to obtain food for his inner man. As the outward man is not fit for work for any length of time except we take food, and as this is one of the first things we do in the morning, so it should be with the inner man. We should take food for that, as every one must allow. Now, what is the food for the inner man? Not prayer, but the Word of God; and here again, not the simple reading of the Word of God, so that it only passes through our minds, just as water runs through a pipe, but considering what we read, pondering over it, and applying it to our hearts. When we pray, we speak to God. Now, prayer, in order to be continued for any length of time in any other than a formal manner, requires, generally speaking, a measure of strength or godly desire, and the season, therefore, when this exercise of the soul can be most effectually performed is after the inner man has been nourished by meditation on the Word of God, where we find our Father speaking to us, to encourage us, to comfort us, to instruct us, to humble us, to reprove us. We may therefore profitably meditate, with God’s blessing, though we are ever so weak spiritually; nay, the weaker we are, the more we need meditation for the strengthening of our inner man. Thus there is far less to be feared from wandering of mind than if we give ourselves to prayer without having had time previously for meditation. I dwell so particularly on this point because of the immense spiritual profit and refreshment I am conscious of having derived from it myself, and I affectionately and solemnly beseech all my fellow believers to ponder this matter. By the blessing of God, I ascribe to this mode the help and strength which I have had from God to pass in peace through deeper trials, in various ways, than I had ever had before; and after having now above fourteen years tried this way, I can most fully, in the fear of God, commend it. In addition to this I generally read, after family prayer, larger portions of the Word of God, when I still pursue my practice of reading regularly onward in the Holy Scriptures, sometimes in the New Testament, and sometimes in the Old, and for more than twenty-six years I have proved the blessedness of it. I take, also, either then or at other parts of the day, time more especially for prayer.

How different, when the soul is refreshed and made happy early in the morning, from what it is when without spiritual preparation, the service, the trials, and the temptations of the day come upon one.²⁴⁸

May 9 1841.

George Müller (1805-1898) was converted from a life of self-indulgence in 1825 while a student in Prussia. In the years that followed he founded the SCRIPTURAL KNOWLEDGE INSTITUTION and made a life’s work of establishing homes for the orphaned poor. His life was characterized by his remarkable trust in God to supply the necessities of life for his numerous dependents. Prayer was his lifeline, and he proved the life of total dependence on God alone to be the practical, workable outcome of the Christian life.

You are here

Why Men Don't Talk

Lesson 1

The Search for “Real Men”

The Model: God’s Role in Creation

Man’s Responsibility: To Walk in God’s Image

Man’s Natural Tendency: To Be Silent

The Example of Adam

The Example of Abraham

The Example of Lot

The Example of Bethuel

The Example of Isaac

Conclusion

Summary

Homework

Lesson 2

The Reality of Mystery

The Search for Certainty

Recipe Theology

Getting on With Life

Be a Tyrant

Dull the Pain

Three Styles of Relating

The Needy Man

The Tough Man

The Godly Man

What Speaking Is Not

Speaking is not just meaningless talking.

Speaking is not just talking.

Speaking is not domination

Conclusion

What Silence Looks Like: Some Modern Examples:

Example 1

Example 2

Example 3

The Solution

The Woman’s Responsibility

Marriage, Abortion and Divorce

The Provision for the Marriage Relationship

The Preparation for the Marriage Relationship

The First Precaution

The Second Precaution

The Third Precaution

The Purpose for the Marriage Relationship

Marriage Provides a New Partnership

Marriage Provides a New Pleasure

Marriage is for Parenthood

The Perils in the Marriage Relationship

The Peril of Adjustment

The Peril of Acceptance

The Peril of Affluence

The Peril of Abortion

The Permanency of the Marriage Relationship

From the series: Confident Children and How They Grow PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

Before you read "Confident Children..."

From the series: Confident Children and How They Grow PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: An Analysis of the Larger Semantic Units of Galatians PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

Appendix for the Larger Semantic Units of Galatians

Addition Relations (Developmental)

Associative Relations Support

From the series: An Analysis of the Larger Semantic Units of Galatians PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

An Introduction to the Book of Numbers

I. TITLE:

II. CHRONOLOGICAL SETTING:

III. CRITICAL CONCERNS IN NUMBERS:

IV. STRUCTURE IN NUMBERS:14

V. PURPOSES OF THE BOOK OF NUMBERS:

From the series: How to Study the Bible: For Beginners PREVIOUS PAGE

Select Bibliography for "How to Study the Bible"

From the series: How to Study the Bible: For Beginners PREVIOUS PAGE

Discipleship Tracks

Track System

Track 1 (Carol)

Overview of Track 1 Lessons:

Track 2 (John)

Overview of Track 2 Lessons:

From the series: Discipleship Track 1 PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

Introduction to Discipleship Track 1

From the series: Discipleship Track 1 PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

The Holy Spirit: God with Us

The Provision
for the Marriage Relationship

The Preparation
for the Marriage Relationship

The Purpose
for the Marriage Relationship

The Perils
in the Marriage Relationship

The Permanency
of the Marriage Relationship

IV. STRUCTURE IN NUMBERS:¹⁴