Some are alleging that “lust” is the consequential equivalent of “fornication.” Hence, if a woman determines her husband has “lusted” after another woman, she may, with impunity, divorce him—with the option of marrying another man. The theory is seriously flawed.
During a recent television interview, in a desperate attempt to suggest that true Christian teaching is not adverse to homosexuality, Patricia Ireland argued that Jesus “never mentioned homosexuality.” The implication clearly was that Christ would have condemned this lifestyle explicitly, had he disapproved of it.
Some allege that all second marriages following a divorce are prohibited. Does this theory have the support of Scripture? Has the New Testament information on this matter been corrupted? Study this issue with us.
America is undergoing a serious erosion of one of the most sacred institutions of humanity—that of marriage. Such will continue to eat away at the very vitals of human existence.
Occasionally we receive questions on the topic of divorce and remarriage. We cannot give unequivocal answers regarding cases wherein we cannot possibly know all the facts. However, we can deal with certain principles.
Are contraceptive methods of birth control equivalent to the practice of abortion?
When is divorce permissible? May a marriage partner divorce his or her spouse simply because they have tired of the marriage? Is “authorization” from God required for a divorce? Study this challenging issue with us.
May the guilty person in a divorce because of fornication remarry?
When “Sick at Heart” wrote to “Dear Abby” concerning her loveless marriage, Abby directed her to seek a “spiritual advisor.” One such advisor wrote in with his perspective. Was it spiritual? For advice to be spiritual and beneficial, it must be scriptural. Jason Jackson challenges “Reverend” Norman L. Conaway’s claim to be providing spiritual advice.
The “Gay community” is “in your face” these days, foisting their agenda of perversion upon a largely unsuspecting society. Progressively downward we seem to spiral, toward an abyss of amoral corruption. In this week’s Penpoints, Jason Jackson responds to the oft-repeated charge of “homophobia.”
Many have been lead into doctrinal error by what may seem to be compelling arguments. But when the logical consequences of such arguments are entertained, their absurdity becomes apparent.
That the institution of marriage has a divine origin is clear. And so it is important to understand what the bible teaches about this sacred relationship.
It is never right to do wrong. But wrong-doing is compounded even more when one perverts Scripture in seeking to rationalize his evil. This week’s Q&A segment deals with the “gift” of celibacy. What is it?
Is “marriage” a divinely designed institution, or is it a human invention? Let us see where the evidence lies.
Several years ago, it would hardly have been necessary to discuss the meaning of “adultery.” Now many believe that adultery is merely the act of repudiating one’s marriage vows, rather than unauthorized sexual conduct involving one who is married.
A new generation of Americans has watched steadily as a deadly plague has descended upon this nation. It is the plague of sexual perversion. Moral people have but two choices: let your voices of protest be heard, or be surrounded increasingly by moral filth.
The marriage principles found in the Bible have a purpose; they are designed for our benefit.
Some allege that the Gospel Accounts—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—reflect Old Testament legislation, and therefore these books do not constitute an authoritative body of instruction for Christians. This article addresses the fallacy of this kind of reasoning.
In Psalm 51, it appears that David is praying for forgiveness after having committed fornication with Bathsheba (as indicated in the superscription). How then could he have said to God, “Against thee, thee only, have I sinned” (v. 4)?