Question:
When the Bible says, “We are not under the law but under grace” (Romans 6:14, 15), is “the law” referring to the Ten Commandments or to something else?

Answer:
It includes the Ten Commandments, but also encompasses all of the law given to Moses and could also include any law or rule of life that we might put ourselves under.

For example, one who says, “A Christian should not drink alcoholic beverages, or smoke, or do drugs, or go to movies, or watch television, and should spend at least a half hour reading the Bible and praying each day,” has stated his/her own version of the law.
Not being under the law does not mean that we are free to do all the things that were once prohibited by the law. Rather, we are set free to have an entirely new and fresh focus for our lives. We no longer obey God’s commandments solely out of fear of His judgment. We no longer make resolutions to do better, only to break them the next day. We no longer try to find loopholes in God’s commandments so that we can do at least a little bit of what we want to do without feeling that we have sinned. We no longer are satisfied with simply carrying out the letter of God’s law.
Under grace, our focus turns to Christ, whose wondrous love and grace, whose infinite sacrifice for our sakes, attracts our hearts to Himself. The love and grace of Christ now motivates us to want to do everything possible to please Him, to obey Him, to serve Him, to bring Him glory. We want to do His will in all things, and we want to become like Him.
We do these things, not in our own strength or through the pressure of keeping resolutions, but through the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Under the law there is a tendency to do the minimum we can get away with—if even that much; under grace we are set free to do God’s will in every part of our lives, because of our great appreciation for Him and His work on the cross and His present work in the glory for our sakes.“For the love of the Christ constrains us, having judged this: that One died for all, then all have died; and He died for all, that they who live should no longer live to themselves, but to Him who died for them and has been raised” (2 Corinthians 5:14, 15).

Question:
Why is it that unleavened bread is not used at the remembrance meeting?

Answer:
When the Lord instituted in remembrance of Himself, what we call the Remembrance Feast or “the Lord’s Supper,” as it is called in 1 Corinthians 11:20, He took bread as a symbol of His body which He gave for us. The bread He used was unleavened since that type of bread was required for the Passover by the law of Moses.

However, when the truth of the Lord’s Supper was revealed to Paul by the Lord, unleavened bread was not mentioned, nor commanded; but just ordinary bread (verses 23 & 24). Whether or not the disciples in the early church used unleavened bread in their remembrance of the Lord is not known from Scripture. They could have used the more commonly available yeast-raised bread just as well.
But if we wish to be guided by the symbolism of Scripture concerning leavened bread, then 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17 is most important. According to these verses the “bread which we break” has a double symbolism. It is a symbol both of Christ’s human body and His spiritual body. He suffered the death of the cross (oh, how He suffered!) in His human body. All true believers know something (how little!) about this. And there is now on earth His body, the Church. “For we being many are one bread [loaf], and one body; for we all are partakers of that one bread [loaf].” Christ has one testimony to Himself on earth. It is His body, the Church, of which every true believer is a member, and in whom sin still dwells, but who “have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts” (Galatians 5:24). When partaking of the loaf we, in addition to remembering the Lord, are testifying to the unity of His body, the Church, on earth. “For we all are partakers of that one bread [loaf].” The word “loaf” is better than “bread” because it is such an excellent symbol of unity. And the unity depicted in the loaf is that of Christ AND His Church, for it is His body. Just as the Church cannot be divided so the body cannot be severed from its Head. This is even true in spite of the Church’s fragmented testimony to Christ. When we see this truth we realize how appropriate a symbol is bread baked with leaven for use in the Remembrance Meeting since our sinless Lord and Savior will ever be one with His Church.

Question:
Is money management and/or investing taught in the Bible? What is the proper course of action according to God and how much should we concern ourselves with this issue?

Answer:
“He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?” (Luke 16:10, 11).

Things of the earth are temporal and therefore “least” when compared to things of heaven, which are eternal. But these verses show that we should also be faithful in temporal things. While exhorted to set our affections “on things above, not on things on the earth” (Colossians 3:2), we should not fail to make prudent use of all that the Lord has entrusted to us now.
We are not given direct written instructions as to how to do this. Better yet, we have the Spirit of God and the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:12, 16). Therefore, as we walk in the Spirit, we become sensitive to the tenor of Scripture, and we are enabled to understand and apply the principles we see there.
[The Lord wants us to be “faithful and wise stewards” of our time, money, and everything He has entrusted to our care (Luke 12:42-44). Here are a few verses that tell us how He wants us to use our money.
(1) As with everything in our lives, the Lord should receive His share of our money first. “Now concerning the collection for the saints….Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him” (1 Corinthians 16:2).
(2) We must take care of our own responsiblities. “If any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Timothy 5:8).
(3) We are to “Remember the poor” (Galatians 2:10), and when we give, “Let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth” (Matthew 6:3).
Interest in the bank of heaven is “an hundredfold” or ten thousand percent (Matthew 19:29)! We cannot take our money with us when we depart this life, but we can send it on ahead.
Also, this will help us to live for Christ now for Jesus said: “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Matthew 6:21). How we use our temporal things now, also determines our place in Christ’s kingdom in the soon coming day! Isn’t it wonderful that we are able now to bring honor and glory to Him who died for us through the temporal things He has entrusted to our care, and also that this will be the means of our being “blessed” in the glory (Luke 12:43)? The Spirit of God encourages the Lord’s dear people to “Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth” (Colossians 3:2). Ed.]

Question:
In Genesis 26:5, God is talking to Isaac, and one of the things He mentions is that his father Abraham obeyed His voice, kept His charge, commandments, statutes, and laws. Now some of you have probably guessed my question already. The law and all of its commandments weren’t given until the time of Moses and the Israelites. Why or how then does (or can) God say that Abraham kept these things?

Answer:
In Genesis 26:5 the Lord says: “Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”

It is certainly true that the Mosaic Law was not in existence during Abraham’s life (it came 430 years after God gave the promises to Abraham—see Galatians 3:16, 17), but this does not negate the truth of Genesis 26:5. Earlier in Genesis we read, “For I know him [Abraham], that he will command his children and his household after him, and THEY SHALL KEEP THE WAY OF THE LORD, TO DO JUSTICE AND JUDGMENT; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which He hath spoken of him” (Genesis 18:19).
We can infer from these verses that although Abraham had not been given “the Law,” he had been given certain commandments in order that he might “keep the way of the Lord.” One of the commandments given to Abraham is found in Genesis 17:10, 11, “This is my covenant, WHICH YE SHALL KEEP, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.” We know that Abraham “obeyed his voice” and had all males in his household circumcised.
We read of another command that God gave to Abraham in Genesis 22:2, “And He [God] said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.” This was no doubt the hardest command that Abraham had ever received, and yet we read of his faithful response in the next verse, “And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him.”
We could cite other examples of “commandments” that were given unto Abraham, but these two will suffice to show us that there were indeed commands given to Abraham. It is also very possible that he was given “charges, commandments, statutes, and laws” of which Scripture is silent. The point we want to make is that they were not the same laws which the children of Israel received from God through Moses.One more point we should make is that although Abraham was given certain commandments and laws, he was not UNDER THE PRINCIPLE OF LAW, as the children of Israel were when they received the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai. Abraham was actually under grace. This is easily seen in the epistle of Galatians, where God contrasts “Law” and “Grace” and he uses Abraham as an example (see 3:1-18) of one who was under grace, and not under law. We can say the same of us today. Even though we have been given certain commandments, we are not “under law,” but “under grace” (Romans 6:14).

Question:
In Mark 16:15-20 it says certain signs will accompany those who believe. Should it be the same today: should these signs accompany us if we believe and are saved? Hebrews 13:8 says Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. If Christ is the same shouldn’t His teachings be the same? Malachi 3:6 says the Lord does not change.

Answer:
Before we consider the first question dealing with whether or not signs should accompany believers today, let’s try to answer the second question: “If Christ is the same, shouldn’t His teachings be the same?” I would like to show from Scripture that this reasoning is simply not true, and therefore, it is not a true premise upon which one can conclude that supernatural signs must accompany all who believe up to the present time.

In the so-called “Sermon on the Mount,” we have the Lord Jesus teaching the multitudes (Matthew chapters 5-7). In 5:21 He refers to the teachings they had received under the Mosaic Law with the expression: “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time,” and He then goes on to say to them, “But I say unto you,” which is followed by a new teaching which either changes or adds to the former teaching received under Moses. He does this no less than six times (see 5:21, 22, 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 38, 39, 43, 44).
Let’s look at verses 43 and 44: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and HATE THINE ENEMY. But I say unto you, LOVE YOUR ENEMIES, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” This is quite a change in God’s teaching, wouldn’t you say!? To go from hating one’s enemy to loving him is about as drastic a change as can be.
Under ACTION the Law, God taught His people to hate their enemies and we know from Scripture that He even had them destroy their enemies without mercy at times (see 1 Samuel 15:1-3 for an example of this). But when Christ came, He came “full of grace and truth” (John 1:14, 17), and just as He manifested God’s grace to His enemies, He would have His disciples display the same grace to their enemies. So we see that God can, and does, change His teachings at times, according to His purposes for mankind. I might just add here that after the rapture of the church to glory, the Jews who are saved will once again resort to the teaching of hating their enemies. Many of the Psalms speak of the faithful remnant of Jews who will go through the tribulation and they will be praying for the destruction of their enemies (see Psalms 74 and 79 as examples of this, along with Revelation 6:9, 10). So to reason that because Christ does not change, His teachings must remain the same, is faulty logic. Thus, we cannot use that as a reason for saying that, because Christ taught that certain signs would follow them that believe, it must be true for all believers at all times.
I believe the “key” to answering the first question lies in Mark 16:20: “And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and CONFIRMING THE WORD WITH SIGNS FOLLOWING.” Supernatural signs were given by God to CONFIRM (make firm, establish, make secure) the Word. This was the chief purpose for the signs. A “sign” is something that points someone to something; in this case the signs were used to point people to the Word.
In Hebrews 2:3, 4 we read, “How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him; GOD ALSO BEARING WITNESS, BOTH WITH SIGNS AND WONDERS, AND WITH DIVERS MIRACLES.” Here is another passage which speaks of SIGNS being given to confirm the Word. This “so great salvation” which the Lord spoke of, and then those who heard Him, was accompanied by signs which would serve to authenticate the Word spoken. Why was there the need of signs? I would like to offer two reasons:

(1)  God had not spoken to man for 400 years (His last word was through the prophet Malachi) and after that much time one would be very leery of anyone professing to be inspired of God and proclaiming His Word. But with supernatural signs accompanying the message, God could draw attention to the fact that this was from Him.

(2)  The new message (spoken of as “so great salvation”) that God was going to give to men was going to be very hard to believe. The truths of Christianity were, in many cases, in direct contrast to the truths God has formerly given in Judaism, and God would graciously use signs to wean His people of old from that former teaching. Think of the Jew who had been raised under the Law, with all of its penalties for those who would break it, now hearing a message which, instead of demanding something from him and punishing him for not producing what the Law demanded, spoke of God’s giving His Son to redeem them who were under the Law. And think of the heavenly blessings and destiny promised to the one who believed on God’s Son. This was in direct contrast to the Jew’s portion under the Law, for his blessings and future promises were all earthly. So we see that this new message concerning Christ was going to be hard to believe, especially for a pious Jew who had been raised under Law. How good of God to confirm His Word with signs!

In Acts 6:7 we read, “And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith” (see also Acts 12:24; 19:20). These verses clearly reveal that the Word of God was bearing precious fruit, thus the signs that accompanied the Word were indeed used of God mightily to “confirm the Word.”I will close my thoughts on this subject by referring to two facts. (1) As we read the book of Acts it becomes obvious that “signs” were very prominent in the beginning, but as we read on they are hardly mentioned. In the last chapters of this great historical book they disappear altogether, except for one case recorded in Acts 28:1-9. (2) In the later epistles that Paul wrote, we hear nothing about signs and miracles. Not one syllable is uttered regarding tongues or any of the other signs mentioned in Mark 16. But we do hear of Paul’s companion, Epaphroditus, being “sick nigh unto death” (Philippians 2:25-30). And although he was later healed, we have nothing to lead us to believe that Paul or anyone else healed him. Instead, we read that “God had mercy on him” (v. 27). In 1 Timothy 5:23 Paul encourages Timothy to use a little wine for medicinal purposes. And in Paul’s very last epistle we read of Paul leaving Trophimus sick at Miletum (2 Timothy 4:20). Surely these instances are instructive, and the unbiased reader is forced to conclude that signs, such as healing, did indeed cease after their intended purpose (which was to “confirm the Word”) was over.

Question:
Concerning baptism…Do you have to be baptized in water? Or is baptism something else?

Answer:
I would like to try to answer this question by briefly looking at the two kinds of baptism that are relevant today. They are (1) The baptism of the Holy Spirit; and (2) baptism with water unto Jesus Christ. We will see that both baptisms introduce us into something, the former into the body of Christ (the true church of God), the latter into the realm of profession here on earth (the kingdom of heaven).

(1) Read the following Scriptures: Matthew 3:11; Acts 1:5; 2:1-4; 10:44; 11:15,16; 1 Corinthians 12:13. In the first two passages we have the baptism of the Spirit foretold; in the next three passages we have the historical accounts of this baptism given; and in the last passage we have the doctrine of this baptism stated. We see from these verses that only believers participate in this baptism and that the result is that they are introduced into the mystical body of Christ. On the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit came down to indwell the believers who were assembled and in so doing the body of Christ was formed. In Acts 10 we have an example of the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit adding souls to the body of Christ. The moment Cornelius and his friends believed the gospel, the baptism of the Holy Spirit took place. Ephesians 1:13 teaches us that this is the pattern for today: one believes the gospel, and the Holy Spirit of promise is given as soon as the soul believes.
(2) Read the following Scriptures: Matthew 28:19, 20 (JND version); Romans 6:3, 4 (JND); Acts 10:47,48. In the first passage we have the command given to baptize; in the second we have the doctrine stated; and in the third we have a historical account given of people being baptized according to the command given in Matthew 28.
Let us take note of a few things that these verses bring out: (A) BAPTISM and TEACHING are necessary for one to be DISCIPLED; (B) Baptism is “unto Christ Jesus”; and (C) It is with water that one is baptized in the name of the Lord.
(A) On the authority of Matthew 28:19 we can say that “baptism is the initiatory rite of Christianity by which one officially becomes a disciple [follower] of Christ.” We saw earlier that the baptism of the Spirit brought one into the true church of God, the body of Christ. Here we learn that one is brought into the body of Christ’s disciples here on earth by baptism (followed by teaching the one baptized the truths that Christ had taught). The King James Version is somewhat obscure here, but Mr. J. N. Darby’s version is crystal-clear. It reads, “Go [therefore] and MAKE DISCIPLES of all nations, BAPTIZING them…teaching them…” This is not to be confused with preaching the gospel to the unsaved, for baptism has no place there (see 1 Corinthians 1:17). Rather, this verse commands believers to disciple those who are willing to be discipled, and it is by BAPTIZING and TEACHING that this is accomplished.
(B) Baptism is “unto Christ Jesus.” What do we mean by that? To help us understand this we will read 1 Corinthians 10:1, 2, “…all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and all were BAPTIZED UNTO MOSES in the cloud and in the sea.” When the children of Israel went through the Red Sea they came under the authority of Moses as their God-given leader. He was their teacher and guide. In water baptism we come under the authority of Christ Jesus. In that significant act we are identifying with the Lord Jesus Christ and placing ourselves under His Lordship (read Ephesians 4:5 in this connection). We are in essence saying, “I am going to follow the Lord Jesus Christ. His teachings will be my guide and I will submit to all that He commands me.”
(C) In the example given us in Acts 10:47, 48 we can put some of our former thoughts together. In verse 47 we read, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” Peter knew that Cornelius and his friends had been saved. He knew that their hearts would now be open to being discipled; that is, he knew that they would be willing to submit to coming under the Lordship of Christ in baptism. Thus, “He commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord” (v. 48). It was “in the name of the Lord” (though no doubt it was actually in the Name of the Triune God as commanded in Matthew 28:19) because, as mentioned above, His Lordship is being owned in the act of baptism. And we do see here that it was water in which they were baptized (see also Acts 8:36,38 JND).
Why water? I would suggest two possible reasons. (1) The water in which one is immersed (immersion seems to be the proper mode based on Acts 8:36, 38, 39 JND) signifies the truth of Romans 6:4, “We are BURIED WITH HIM BY BAPTISM into death.” (2) In Acts 22:16 we read of Ananias’ words to Saul, “Arise, and be baptized, and WASH AWAY THY SINS, calling upon the Name of the Lord.” Here we read of the waters of baptism “washing away sins.” Surely this is not speaking of one’s sins being washed away before God (Saul’s sins were already forgiven before God when Ananias spoke those words), for that is only accomplished by the blood of Christ (1 John 1:7; Revelation 1:5). But Scripture does speak of a forgiveness of sins BEFORE MEN (see John 20:23). I take it that this means that when one submits to baptism (which means he is willingly becoming a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ), he is then forgiven by his fellow-disciples of Christ who have been the instruments by which he was admitted into the kingdom of heaven. (The “kingdom of heaven” refers to the sphere where the Lordship of Christ is professed. It is disciples of Christ who disciple others, by BAPTISM and TEACHING, into this kingdom. See and compare Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 28:19, 20.)

Question:
What if, in “the heat of the moment,” one tells a lie to protect himself before he realizes what he is doing? Will he lose his salvation?

Answer:
No. However, that person should still deal with that lie as a sin and not justify it as being allowable under the trying circumstances.

Let us be sure to keep our accounts clear with God. Let us remember to confess our sins when they happen. When we do so, we will find that God “is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9).

Question:
What about Rahab and the Hebrew midwives who lied to protect the lives of others (Joshua 2:3-6; Exodus 1:16-20)? We are told that “God dealt well with the midwives” (Exodus 1:20) and, “By faith the harlot Rahab perished not…when she had received the spies with peace” (Hebrews 11:31; also James 2:25). Does this mean that their lies were justified?

Answer:
“The midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive” (Exodus 1:17). And Rahab hid the spies because she realized that “The Lord your God, He is God in heaven above, and in earth beneath” (Joshua 2:11).

Both Rahab and the midwives manifested faith in the God of Israel, and God rewarded their faith, even though in both cases weakness of that faith was manifested in their telling falsehoods. In James 2:25 we read, “Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?” Notice that it does not say that Rahab was justified by words (that is, by her falsehood), but by works (that is, by her protection of the spies). We can be sure that had Rahab and the midwives been stronger in their faith and confidence in the Lord, they still would have been able to carry out their missions for the Lord without having to tell lies.

Question:
Telling a lie is never right, but what about a life-threatening situation? Suppose a man is threatening to rape me. Is it okay to say that I have AIDS or something like that in hopes he will leave me alone?

Answer:
The Bible never gives justification for telling a lie. One should never prepare for dangerous situations by planning to tell a lie if necessary. Rather, if one feels they need to rehearse in their minds what they would say if confronted by a robber, rapist, etc., it would be far more appropriate to prepare to speak the name of Christ or to call out to God for help than to prepare to tell a lie. It would also be well for that person to begin praying that the Lord would keep him/her from such a situation. “Lead us not into temptation [or trial)” (Matthew 6:13).

Here are three true stories:
(1) A Christian man, when confronted by three armed robbers, looked them in the eye and said, “You can’t touch me; I am a child of God.” The robbers fled.
(2) A Christian teen-age girl was jogging in a park in Minneapolis when a man came up from behind and grabbed her and threatened to kill her. She had the presence of mind to say to him, “The Lord is protecting me; Jesus loves you,” whereupon he released her and disappeared. (3) Three teen-age brothers, all Christians, were swimming at a lake when challenged to a fight by three slightly older boys. The Christians refused, and when asked why they wouldn’t fight, the oldest brother responded, wisely, “Because we are afraid of you.” The trouble-makers left in disgust. The point of the last story is that it is no disgrace for a Christian to be called “sissy,” “scaredy-cat,” “yellow,” or the like, for behaving like Christ. They called Christ worse names than that and He responded meekly without retaliating, or with silence (Isaiah 53:7; Matthew 26:60-68; 1 Peter 2:23).

Question:
Should I allow people to take advantage of me? Is it okay to retaliate once in awhile?

Answer:
The Bible says, “Avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink; for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12: 19-21).

This last phrase is spelled out more in Matthew 5:44: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you, that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven; for He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.”
There is special blessing for those who behave in this way toward people who are difficult to get along with: “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for My sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you” (Matthew 5:10-12; see also 1 Peter 2:20). In a situation where a fellow employee, say, is taking unfair advantage of me (either to try my patience or knowing that I, being a Christian, will not retaliate), it may be appropriate, occasionally, for me to point out to the offender that I am aware he is taking advantage of me and to thank him for the opportunity he gives me of reaping the eternal reward of patiently responding as Christ would have responded. Or I may respond to each offence by giving the offender a gospel tract or speaking a word for Christ, along with doing what has been asked of me.

Question:
Is it okay to visit a grave every so often?

Answer:
“When the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint [the body of Jesus]” (Mark 16:1). These ladies received a great blessing as a result of their desire to visit their Lord’s tomb and to honor Him by anointing His body.

It would certainly seem to be appropriate to visit a loved one’s grave if this helps one to work out his/her grief in the loss of the loved one and to remember that person.
At the same time, if the one who died was saved, we know that the soul and spirit are not in the grave but are now “present with the Lord” (2 Corinthians 5:8), and we can look forward to the day when we, too, shall be present with the Lord and reunited with our loved one who has died. If the grave marker has a Scripture verse or some other testimony to Christ, it is well to visit the grave periodically to make sure that the site is cleared of weeds and debris.

Question:
There are some things that we need that God supplies (Philippians 4:19). But sometimes there are things which may be a need or can be a want. How do we discern?

Answer:
According to the Scripture, what are the things that we need? Food, drink, and clothing (Matthew 6:31, 32); forgiveness and salvation (Matthew 9:12, 13); patience (Hebrews 10:36). Surely, the greatest of these needs is eternal salvation.

In reference to food, drink, and clothing, the Lord says, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matthew 6:33). So if our constant prayer is for God’s will to be done in our lives and for Him to be glorified through us, then we can leave it up to God to give us what He—in His perfect wisdom—knows that we truly need and what is best for our spiritual growth and holiness. In connection with this, it might be a profitable study of Scripture to identify the various things which the Lord Jesus and the apostles prayed for. For example, the Lord prayed, “Father, forgive them” (Luke 23:34) and the apostles prayed for boldness in proclaiming the Word of God (Acts 4:29, 31; Ephesians 6:19). Praying earnestly for things we want rather than what we need can sometimes be risky: “And [God] gave them their request, but sent leanness into their soul” (Psalm 106:15).

Question:
First Timothy 2:11, 12 reads: “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” In an assembly Bible study, can a woman submit her opinions of the Bible to the men or should they wait until the service is over? Or was this just a law of that time?

Answer:
Taking the second question first, no, it was not just a law of that time. It is instruction by the Holy Spirit through the inspired Apostle Paul that is as good in 1995 A.D. as in 65 A.D. It would seem best, according to the Scripture quoted, for the woman to save her questions or thoughts till after the study is over. Even to write notes to her husband could be disruptive and distracting.

A better way of dealing with this is for husband and wife to spend some time prior to the meeting studying the portion with each other. That way the husband will learn his wife’s questions and thoughts in advance and can either respond to them on the spot or raise the questions in the meeting if he is not sure of the answers. An unmarried sister could do the same with her father or could pose her questions to another brother prior to the meeting—allowing enough time for the brother to research and think about the answers to her questions.

Question:
We are always taught that “once saved, always saved.” But consider the following situation: A client walks into her attorney’s office (the attorney professes to be a born-again Christian). The client asks the attorney if he had heard already of her present problem, seeing that it was broadcast over the television station. The attorney lies and tells the client he hasn’t, even through he has heard about it. Should we say the attorney is a man who doesn’t practice the truth and is not a true, born-again believer? Or is this attorney doing what is right?

Answer:
Telling a lie is never right. “Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord” (Proverbs 12:22). “Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbor: for we are members one of another” (Ephesians 4:25).

On the other hand, if a true, born again believer gets his eyes off the Lord and in his self-interest tells a lie (as Peter did three times), he does not lose his salvation. There are plenty of Scriptures that confirm the eternal security of the true believer in Christ (John 3:16; 10:27-29; Romans 8:35-39; 1 John 1:7; etc.).
Now, what does the Bible say the client should do if she catches her born-again attorney—or any other professing Christian—lying to her? The Lord instructs us in Matthew 18:15, “If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear you, thou hast gained thy brother.”
But what if he says that lying is essential at times for one in his line of business? The Lord continues, “But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses very word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church; but if he neglect to hear the church let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican” (Matthew 18:16, 17). We are not to judge whether such a person is really saved; it may be that only the Lord knows for sure whether this man is truly saved or not (2 Timothy 2:19). But if he persists in justifying his sinful behavior, then we no longer have any basis for fellowshipping with him as if he were a Christian.

Question:
We all know that cocaine is known as an illegal drug. We have also heard of studies where cocaine is included in medication for sick people. Would a person who takes such medication be sinning or become a drug addict?

Answer:
An example we are more familiar with is giving morphine to patients with terminal cancer to relieve constant, intense, excruciating pain. (Perhaps cocaine is used for the same purpose.) If one is terminally ill, he probably will not survive long enough to become addicted.

If one is having intense pain but is not terminally ill (such as following surgery or an injury), one should ask their physician about the potential for addiction if the physician prescribes a narcotic like morphine for pain.
When Jesus was suffering on the cross, He refused to take the gall (a sedative) offered to Him (Matthew 27:34) so as to experience to the fullest degree possible the judgment of God for our sins. If we are experiencing intense pain, it is our privilege to refuse painkillers—especially potentially addicting ones—so that we can experience just a little of what Christ suffered for our sakes (Philippians 3:10). But if we cannot stand the pain and relief is available, it surely would not be sinful to accept a pain-killer or sedative.