........Recently, a fellow evangelist asked me this question: "Is Marriage a Command or a Liberty?" Over the past few years, some brethren, in their zeal to answer the "race to the courthouse" position, have been describing the God given blessing and institution of marriage as a command. The implications and consequences of this overstatement are that God requires one to be married; consequently, according to this doctrine those who are of marriageable age and still single must be in sin. This is taught in an over-reaction against the erring doctrine that the government is the final word in determining whether or not one is truly married or divorced. God's word is the final determinant.
........I object to the assertion that marriage is a command. One damages his case against the race to the courthouse position by exaggerating the truth. He needs to be careful in asserting that marriage is a command, because he cannot support it scripturally; those who are in error will dismiss the balance of his argument over this. The word of God teaches that marriage is a blessing from God, not a commandment. One cannot build a case from scripture that God requires marriage, but he can prove that God advises it. Otherwise, where is the sin and what is the punishment when one does not marry?
........Some mistakenly use "it is better to marry than to burn" from 1Corinthians 7 to prove their point, but that passage is for people who cannot contain themselves. Note the whole passage: "But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion" (1Cor. 7:8-9). In this text, Paul counsels the single life for persons under the "present distress," so indeed there are circumstances in which a person would be making the better choice if he did not marry. The very fact that he can choose under these circumstances to marry or remain single indicates that he is not commanded to marry. Otherwise, he sins when he chooses to remain single.
........In addition, the apostle Paul himself chose not to marry. He said: "Do we have no right to eat and drink? Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working?" (1Cor. 9:4-6). Note that Paul said he had a "right" to a wife; by definition it means that he was permitted to choose. If marriage were a command, he would have said instead: "Do we not have the obligation to take along a believing wife?" Notice also that Paul sandwiched the point about marriage in between two other matters of liberty. Choosing whether or not to eat meats and choosing whether or not to accept a salary for preaching, both of which are matters of liberty for the preacher, and both of which under some circumstances may need to be surrendered for a higher purpose.
........Older widows are not commanded to marry in 1Timothy 5, but instead are blessed when they devote themselves to good works. May widows choose to marry? Of course; 1Cor. 7:39-40 states: "A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. But she is happier if she remains as she is, according to my judgment--and I think I also have the Spirit of God." He even uses the word "liberty in this passage implying choice. She can therefore choose to marry, or she may choose to devote herself to lodging strangers, washing the saints' feet, relieving the afflicted, and diligently following every good work (1Tim. 5:10).
........The Lord told his disciples, when they were astonished at his stern teaching on divorce and remarriage in Matthew 19, that there were some who would have to make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom's sake. If a man who was involved in an unscriptural divorce before becoming a Christian, he would have to remain single for the rest of his life in order to be a Christian. If he had to literally emasculate himself in order to be in the kingdom, then he needs do it. In other words, there are some circumstances where one may not marry.
........There are men and women who as the Lord put it, "are born eunuchs" (Matt. 19:12). They have no sexual interest, cannot procreate, but are godly, devout human beings by themselves. They can teach the lost and teach adult and children's Bible classes; they can wait on the sick and be very involved in the work of the church and in community civic projects. Are they in sin because they choose to remain unmarried? If marriage is a command, then they are obligated to be married, right? Some might reason, "Well they are men and women with reproductive organs; so, whether or not they have no interest, they must get married and try to have children. And to such a man I would say, "Where is the book, chapter, and verse? And, please give me something more than a passage in which Paul is advising the single life when one is under difficult circumstances."
........Therefore, to say that marriage is a command is saying more than what the scriptures say. It is an overstatement. While the ideal condition for man is to be married (Gen. 2:18), the fact that in four of the above mentioned sets of scriptural circumstances the persons were permitted to choose to remain single without sin means that one is free to choose marriage, but is not required to. Where in scripture has God ever given a command and left it up to man's own judgment as to whether or not he must obey it? It necessarily follows that marriage belongs in the category of permissive authority and not restrictive authority. We are permitted to marry; we are not required to marry.
........If a Christian found himself in a position where the circumstances dictated that it is better to remain single, then by all means he may choose the wise course between the two. To say that one is commanded to marry is an overstatement. It matters not how repugnant an erring brethren's arguments may be on the matter of divorce and remarriage; marriage is a liberty; we are free to choose to marry or not. It is not necessary to overstate the case in order to answer a mistaken position. One must find a way to answer doctrinal excesses without saying more than the scriptures teach.

........Who Doesn't Believe in God? Ten percent of Protestants, 21 percent of Roman Catholics, and 62 percent of Jews do NOT believe in God. That's the surprising word from a new survey by Harris Interactive of 2,306 adults that shows belief in God varies quite widely among different segments of the American public. How often do Americans go to a place of worship? Not much. Most people attend a religious service less than once a month. Still, Americans are far more likely to believe in God and to attend religious services than people in most other developed countries, particularly in Europe.
........Who Believes in God? While 79 percent of Americans believe there is a God, only 66 percent are absolutely certain of it. Nine percent do not believe in God and 12 percent aren't sure. And strangely enough, not everyone who calls himself a Christian or a Jew actually believes in God.
........Who Worships at a Religious Service? Just over half (55 percent) attend a religious service a few times a year or more. Thirty-six percent attend once a month or more often, and just 26 percent say they attend every week. Forty-one percent of women and 31 percent of men attend once a month or more. Protestants (47 percent) are more likely to go to church once a month or more often, than are Roman Catholics (36 percent). Jews are least likely to go with 16 percent saying they go to synagogue once a month or more. Church attendance is highest in the Midwest and lowest in the West.
........Belief in God by Geography and Age: Eighty-two percent of Midwesterners and Southerners believe in God, compared with 75 percent in the East and West. Our beliefs get stronger as we age. Of those 25 to 29 years old, 71 percent believe in God. That number jumps to 80 percent for people over 40, and hits 83 percent for those 65 and over.
........Other Facts about Who Believes in God: 84 percent of women believe in God, compared with 73 percent of men. 91 percent of African Americans believe in God, compared with 81 percent of Hispanic and 78 percent of whites. 87 percent of Republicans believe in God, compared with 78 percent of Democrats and 75 percent of Independents. 82 percent of those with no college education believe in God, compared with 73 percent who went to college.

1. The Gift of Listening. But you must really listen. No interrupting, no daydreaming, no planning your response. ....Just listening.
2. The Gift of Affection. Be generous with appropriate hugs, kisses, pats on the back, and handholds. Let these ....small actions demonstrate the love you have for family and friends.
3. The Gift of Laughter. Clip cartoons. Share articles and funny stories. Your gift will say, "I love to laugh with you.
4. The Gift of a Written Note. It can be a simple "Thanks for the help" note or a full sonnet. A brief, handwritten ....note may be remembered for a lifetime and may even change a life.
5. The Gift of a Compliment. A simple and sincere, "You look great in red," "You did a super job," or "That was a ....wonderful meal" can make someone's day.
6. The Gift of a Favor. Every day, go out of your way to do something kind.
7. The Gift of Solitude. There are times when we want nothing better than to be left alone. Be sensitive to those ....times and give the gift of solitude to others.
8. The Gift of a Cheerful Disposition. The easiest way to feel good is to extend a kind word to someone; really it's ....not that hard to say, "Hello" or "Thank You." (Author Unknown)

........"And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him. ........Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:
........'Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
........Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
........Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
........Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.
........Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
........Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
........Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
........Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
........Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My ........sake'" (Matt. 5:1-11).
Then Simon Peter said, "Do we have to write this down?"
And Andrew said, "Are we supposed to know this?"
And Philip said, "What if we don't know it?"
And Bartholomew said, "Do we have to turn this in?"
And John said, "The other disciples didn't have to learn this."
And Matthew said, "When do we get out of here?"
And Judas said,' "What does this have to do with real life?"
........Then one of the Pharisees present asked to see Jesus' lesson plans and inquired of Jesus his annual goals and short term objectives in the cognitive, affective and psychomotor domains.
........And Jesus wept.
Those of you who are teachers can relate to this (all too well, I'm sure). And all of us who have been students can recall having the same attitude in school: "If this isn't going to be on the test, then I'm not going to write it down, I'm not going to learn it, I'm not going to remember it, and you can't make me!"
........Perhaps some of that same attitude carries over into the workplace. "If doing this doesn't contribute to my chances for a promotion down the road (translation: 'it's not on the test'), then I'm not about to put forth the extra effort it would require."
........Or how about in the local church? Ever heard someone say, "I don't attend on Sunday evenings and Wednesday nights because I don't think you have to do that to go to heaven"? (translation: "I don't think it's on the test"). At what point in our Christian lives did we turn from wanting to learn, wanting to grow, wanting to do everything we can possibly do for God, to doing the least amount necessary to just barely "pass the test?"
"This is my prayer for you: that your love will grow more and more; that you will have knowledge and understanding with your love; that you will see the difference between good and bad and will choose the good; that you will be pure and without wrong for the coming of Christ; that you will do many good things with the help of Christ to bring glory and praise to God" (Phil. 1:9-11). (Selected)

........Moses wrote these words of truth many years ago: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). In contrast, Charles Darwin, the father of the modern theory of evolution wrote these words: "Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed" (On the Origin of Species; 1964 Harvard University Press edition; p.484). The theory of evolution (also known as "general evolution") says that life came from non-life billions of years ago through a process of gradual change from one life form to another (amoeba to man).
........What has been the impact of the theory of evolution on modern man? Well, most secular schools teach evolution. Young people are also taught the theory of evolution outside the classroom from television, games, entertainment, books, etc. Surprisingly, many religious schools teach some form of evolution (for example, the University of Chicago Divinity School). Also, many Americans show signs of the theory of evolution working in their lives. This article will examine of few of those signs. Even a few Christian brethren accept the theory of evolution.
........What has the theory of evolution done for America? It has given us a "scientific," but false explanation for the origin of life. But, that's not all! It has attacked the very moral fiber of our nation. Evolution has to do with much more than science or biology. If the theory of evolution is right, then there is no God, no Bible, no law, no standard of behavior, and no order! Consider a few quotes that demonstrate evolution's attack on the morality of man. Sir Julian Huxley, a student of Darwin said: "Darwinism removed the whole idea of God as creator of organisms from the sphere of rational discussion." Jean-Paul Sartre said: "If there is no God, everything is permitted." Woolsey Teller said: "... the God idea cannot be reconciled with our knowledge of evolution." This statement was made in a pamphlet entitled Evolution Implies Atheism published by the AAAA (American Association for the Advancement of Atheism). Charles Smith, the former president of the AAAA said: "The theory of evolution bankrupts the Bible ... If we descended from apes, we do not need a Savior ... If you accept evolution you must give up the Bible ... ........The theory of evolution is atheism; it substitutes the natural law for supernatural intelligence."
There is no question that the theory of evolution has influenced man negatively. For example, Darwin believed that it was wrong to help the poor because it would interfere with natural selection, or survival of the fittest. Adolf Hitler and his "super race" or "master race" is a prime example of the moral breakdown caused by following evolution ("selective breeding"/ "survival of the fittest"). The theory of evolution, like any teaching, has consequences. Let us examine some of the important moral consequences of evolution.
........................................................Moral Consequences of Evolution
........Evolution attacks our concept of religion. The Bible says that religion was ordained of God (Genesis 4:3-5; Hebrews 11:4). Evolution offers a total rejection of religion, or a toleration of all religions. According to evolution, since religion, like man, evolved, it can be either completely rejected or tolerated; it doesn't matter. There are other related consequences: 1) since truth evolves, truth is relative, not absolute; 2) Genesis 1-2 is viewed as mythological, not literal or inspired; and, 3) a compromise is made between Creation and Evolution called "Theistic Evolution." Shortly after Darwin's book, Origin of Species, was published both Bible books and legal laws began to be viewed as evolutionary in nature.
........Evolution attacks our concept of self. The Bible says we have self-worth (Genesis 1:26-27; 9:6; Psalm 8:3-5; Matthew 16:26). Evolution offers no sense of self worth. According to evolution, we are nothing more than sophisticated animals. For example, Desmond Morris wrote a book called, The Naked Ape, 1967, and Phil Donahue wrote a book called, The Human Animal, 1985. It is no wonder that so many people have low self-worth and low self-esteem which leads to personal problems within themselves and their family.
Evolution attacks our purpose for being. The Bible says we have an important purpose for being which is to serve God (Ecclesiastes 12:13; Matthew 22:37-39). Evolution offers no purpose for being. It leads to a dismal life.
Evolution attacks the concept of our destiny. The Bible says we are destined to one of two places: heaven or hell (Eccl.12:7; Mt.25:34, 36, 41, 46). Evolution offers no destiny. With a sense of destiny comes hope, motivation, and endurance. Evolution offers none of these. It is no wonder that so many people are depressed, despondent and in despair.
........Evolution attacks our concept of morality. The Bible says that morality is God-given; is absolute; is accountable (Jeremiah 10:23; Proverbs 3:5-8). Evolution offers human, relative, unaccountable morality. Moral irresponsibility soon follows. Guy N. Woods once wrote: "Convince a man that he came from a monkey and he'll act like one." There are two examples of this in our society today. The first example is the devaluation of human life. There are approximately 1.2 million abortions annually in America. We also have euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide which kill off the elderly. The second example is sexual misconduct. There is a high rate of heterosexual fornication and homosexual fornication in this country. There is no question that the belief in evolution leads man to be immoral. Jeffrey Dahlmer admitted that his belief in evolution lead him to do the atrocities that he did.
........................................................................Conclusion
........It is interesting that many evolutionists believe that following "Christian principles" is good. Ronald Nash wrote: "When it comes to living, naturalists (evolutionists - CHR) cheat and borrow aspects of the Christian world-view." Sir Julian Huxley is on record as believing that a person functions better if he acts as though God exists even though he really does not believe it.
........Many do not like to talk about consequences. But we must! Consequences are the natural, logical results of ideas and belief systems. What can Christians do about the theory of evolution? First, realize that evolution has its devastating moral consequences. Second, teach the Bible account of creation with renewed zeal. Third, attack evolution at the private level. Attack evolution for what it is: a theory, a faith, based upon unproven conjecture. Get some good books, tapes, etc. against evolution for you and your children. Fourth, attack evolution at the public level. Get involved with what is going on at the school where your child attends.
........Will we follow the theory of evolution or the truth of Christ? In the Bible, Christ is Creator, Sustainer, Judge, Redeemer and Completer of the all mankind. According to the theory of evolution, the blind chance of evolution is creator, sustainer, judge, redeemer and completer of all mankind. Who do you want your children to follow? It's time to withstand the attacks of evolution.

........Just imagine the scene at Pentecost... 3000 Jews dutifully looking up the books of Joel and Psalms in their black leather-bound Broadman-Holman King James Bibles following along with Peter as he preached. No, the Bible wasn't mass printed in book form until Johann Gutenberg invented the moveable type printing press in Mainz, Germany in 1455. Furthermore, the King James Version wasn't written until 156 years after the invention of the printing press. Therefore, can we conclude that the church as it began in Jerusalem on Pentecost was substandard compared local churches today? After all, there were just 3000 people who only had the apostles' doctrine. ........Contemporary congregations have fewer members, but they follow sermons with black leather bound King James Bibles! Is this the only measure of competency in the scriptures? Is this the only legitimate means of learning the word? An affirmative answer to either question is bibliolatry, not love for the truth.
........In fact, during New Testament times disciples went through three stages of communicating the word. In the earliest days of the church, the word of God was delivered primarily in oral or verbal form; very little was written down and distributed. One of the first records we have of a portion of the will of God being written down and distributed is the brief message sent by the apostles and Jerusalem elders to Antioch in Acts 15:23.
........The second stage of communication was the period of both oral and written delivery of the will of God. Paul Illustrates this in 2Thessalonians 2:15 - "Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle." This indicates that the oral and written word of God was equally binding on the disciples.
........The third stage is the period of the completed will of God in which all of God's word for this dispensation has been written down and preserved. In every stage it must be understood that the Christians were bound to obey the will of God whether they received it by the oral doctrine of the apostles alone, by a combination of oral and written teaching, or by written doctrine alone.
........It must also be understood that the means of communicating the word of God has never been an issue with God. He does not care whether the scroll was made from papyrus or parchment, whether the book was hand written or printed by a machine, whether one reads it himself or another reads it to him, or whether one reads it in a Bible on his lap or on a screen at the front of the auditorium. It is the word of God; it does not cease to be the word of God simply because it is presented electronically.
........When Bibles were first mass printed, I am certain there were folks who complained, "It ain't right to use them impersonal mass printed Bibles. Give me a good old fashioned scroll handwritten by a monk! I miss the sound of them scrolls unrollin' when brother Luther preaches."
........Indeed, we used to be known as a "people of the book." And I am equally certain that 1000 years ago, we were known as a people of the scroll. And in the future when the media changes from paper to electronic, we may be known as a people of the palmtop. So why don't we just call ourselves a people of the word, and stop challenging the means of communicating it?
........When I moved to a new work twenty years ago and began using an overhead projector, one brother fussed at me frequently about how much he disliked "those window-blind sermons" (the screen resembled a window blind). One fellow evangelist recently wrote the following to tease me tongue in cheek:
........"Pity the man that used the first chalkboard; and you know poor old C. D. Plum totally depended on the chalkboard and that new-fangled colored chalk for his sermons. I bet nobody ever looked at their Bibles again. Imagine putting your outlines on a bed sheet. That would have been a "four-fold" sin, maybe even a "six-fold" sin. Then there's Oliver Murray who totally depends on his paper flip-charts. One time he turned too many charts and got all flustered; you'd think a gospel preacher wouldn't have to depend on charts like that. Then there's those Overhead REjectors; what a shame they are. Why I've noticed mother's with babies and older folks who can't turn to the Bible passages as quickly as they used to even getting more out of the lessons, but shame on that preacher for using an aid to learning and not depending totally on his Bible and Bible knowledge to get his points across. And that new fangled Power Point thingy would be in the same ballpark. Yeah, who needs a preacher when you've got Power Point? Reckon we should just put the title of the lesson on the Power Point? How much is an "abuse"? 2 slides? 4 slides? Shame on you, Paul!" (Morris Hafley)
........The elders here at Tomlinson Run decided that I was to use a multimedia projector. I did not ask for it. They asked that I put the scripture texts on the screen for the benefit of the elderly and young mothers who cannot find the texts quickly and for the members who do not commonly follow along in their Bibles. It is not possible to mandate that all of the members follow in their Bibles, but by putting the passages on the screen all of the members are enabled to read along with the preacher. Those members who prefer to read the text in their own Bibles continue do so. The opinions of young preachers with limited experience are secondary when measured against the counsel of three sound elders with a combined total of 83 years of experience in shepherding a strong, faithful congregation of 140 devout saints.
........Putting scripture texts on the screen has not adversely affected the members' ability to find Bible passages when called on to do so. They continue to use their Bibles at home and in Bible classes. In point of fact, members who were not inclined to carry their Bibles and follow the preacher before Power Point, are showing more interest in reading and studying their Bibles at home now that they have seen how effectively scriptures can be used to answer questions. Putting the texts on the screen to make one's point helps to impress the listener with the power of the word, not the technology.
........Can the media be misused? Of course. However, one makes a fallacious argument when he dismisses a tool because of the potential abuse by a few. There have always been reactionaries who opposed changes in media and manner of presentation, even though the changes enhance communication without altering the message.
In addition, memorizing and reciting texts can be misused. I've heard institutional preachers and false teachers stand up and recite dozens of texts flawlessly, and then go on to misapply and wrest the context to teach error. I heard one young preacher often boast of how he uses text memorization and recitation to intimidate opponents and impress the unlearned. I have even heard folks say after hearing such a sermon: "Wow, did you hear him quote the Bible!" When I asked what he preached, they didn't recollect, but they did remember that he had great recall of the text. Should we make the argument that because men abuse memorization and recitation, we should not memorize and recite? Certainly not.
........Nearly every form of communication can be abused. Tracts can be misused, and so can articles posted to discussion lists, gospel meetings, home Bible studies, email correspondence, phone calls, and so on. Perhaps we should have a series of articles on the abuse of tracts, gospel meetings, home Bible studies, etc. Or maybe we should just have more articles on Bible matters and fewer articles against the various means of communicating the word.
........In conclusion, when one comes to understand the motivation behind reactionaries, he realizes it is not necessary to accommodate their demands. Reactionaries insist that old means and media are the only right way. On the surface, this spirit appears to be generated by simple stubbornness or ignorance. However, scratch a little deeper and one will discover that the reactionary is driven by motives that will elicit pity from the observer. Some oppose change because they are afraid of change. Others oppose learning new techniques because they have limited capability in learning new technology. Still others oppose it because they cannot afford it. And yes, there may be some who oppose a new means of communication because they actually believe their way is the best way; these are the most pitiable of all. It is incumbent on us as brethren in Christ to be patient with the ignorant and firm with the stubborn. May the Lord guide us to discern between the two. May He help us avoid becoming reactionary ourselves.