Q. I know this is a controversial issue, but what does the Bible say about birth control?  Is this an instance where we must listen to our God-given conscience because there is no direct instruction on the matter?
–
We Are To Multiply
In order to gain a context for the answer to this somewhat controversial topic in question, we immediately need to be pushed back to Genesis 1:28 “Then God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth…” So what is the obvious point that God is making in this verse?  We are to procreate as human beings, as creations of God.

There may be some random passages which speak about mismanaging a sanctioned opportunity to procreate like the strange account of Onan in Genesis 38:9-10, but that seems to be addressing a specific failure to continue a generational family line.
God Values Embryos As Life
Abortion as birth control is obviously forbidden, as well as something like the “morning after pill” because they both tamper with a developing child already conceived (see Exodus 21:22 “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely…”  Notice the woman is referred to as being with child).  Psalm 139:16 says “Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed…” (my substance, being yet unformed is all one word in the Hebrew: golem – something rolled together, an embryo, a fetus. The interlinear actually reads: “My embryo saw your eyes”).  So we can see that God has great respect for the pre-born, biological development of a human being, which He calls a child.
Silence On The Subject
There doesn’t seem to be any specific, technical mention about birth control in the Bible. So, while avoiding the problems mentioned above, it seems that God leaves things up to the discretion of the couple. Medically speaking, when making the decision to decide on the right birth control pill, a married couple should do research to make sure that the pill chosen does not tamper in any way with an already conceived embryo. That would be the Biblical thing to do.

This is just one’s humble opinion. Do your own research, formulate your own conclusions, and pray that God will give you insight.

Q. I have been wondering what reasonable boundaries should be for modesty in today’s society.  I know the Bible says that it’s better for a woman to be Godly instead of being more concerned with expensive clothing and makeup, but what about swimming suits and stuff?  If I know that my guy classmates are tempted visually, why should I wear a bikini?  That’s not helping them out.  I guess I just need some clarification about what the Bible says.  Thanks.
Great question!  This is one that many of us ladies ask at one point or another in our spiritual journey… especially if we live in warm climates!  As we grow in our Christian faith, we begin to look at others and their needs and as a result, these types of questions arise…

First, let’s look at Romans 12:9-11-“Let love be without hypocrisy.  Abhor what is evil.  Cling to what is good.  Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another, not lagging in diligence, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord…”

What a great passage on the way we are to treat one another!

• “Let love be without hypocrisy” – remember love is not a feeling but an action/choice to put another person’s needs above your own. It could be defined as “a self-less humble service to meet another’s need no matter how lowly the service or how undeserving the person served.  It is a willful, joyful desire to put others over yourself, your feelings, your desires, your ambitions, etc”.  (1 Corinthians 13:1-7)
• “Abhor what is evil.  Cling to what is good” – Bikinis are not evil.  In fact, no piece of clothing is evil… but as you said, the response it prompts in the hearts of some is evil (Romans 14:14-16).  This verse reminds us that we are to pursue what is good over what is evil.
• “Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love… giving preference to one another” – We are to treat every other believer like a family member… these are the people we look out for the MOST!  We are to prefer others over ourselves.  (Philippians 2:3-4)

That being said, let’s look at the principles of Christian Liberty (Romans 14:1-15:13, 1 Corinthians 10:23-30)

1 Corinthians 10:23- All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me  but not all things edify.

In Paul’s day, the argument in the Christian world wasn’t about bikinis but about whether or not it was sinful to eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols in the pagan temples.  Ex-pagans who were now Christians thought it was a horribly sinful practice whereas ex-jewish Christians realized it was yummy meat and not a big deal.  Kind of like today; some Christians have no problem whatsoever wearing bikinis while other Christians really struggle with the idea because it’s a temptation to their brothers.  Let’s briefly look at 4 principles from 1 Corinthians 10:23-30

Remember that we need to love others and put their needs above our own in everything we do… in our speech, in our attitudes, in our time, in our financial giving… and yes, even in our dress.

Galatians 5:13 - For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.

Romans 14:15 – Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died.

If you know that wearing “revealing” clothing causes your Christian brothers to stumble into sin and temptation (Romans 14:21) and your conscience is telling you that it’s wrong, then you have to follow what your conscience is saying and “limit your liberty” to wear certain things in order to protect your brother in Christ.  However, we always must be careful not to condemn others if their conscience does not tell them something is wrong (Romans 14:3)

Remember, our goals are always to love and serve others… we can always measure these types of issues by asking “am I showing love to my brothers and sisters if I do ___________?” or “am I serving others if I do ________ or am I serving myself?”

Q. How is man able to sin prior to the fall? In the Bible it calls Adam and Eve perfect but then they go and sin, does that mean even in a perfect state man sins? If God is also perfect can he sin?
Human beings are engineered, within this life, with the way we are made at this time, to be able to sin.  Romans 5:12 “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world…”  God created people with the capacity to choose, part of the being “made in the image and likeness of God”.  Most people are very positive about possessing this ability to choose, even if it can get us into trouble.  Which it has.  But the ability to choose is the preferred design for humanity, not a pre-programed ability to always make the correct choice (like a machine, a robot).  So even though Adam and Eve were perfect, they possessed the ability to disobey and become imperfect, because of their humanness.

The biblical solution seems to be, obtain a regenerated spirit (Ephesians 2:1, theologians view our human spirits as the part of us being made alive), achieve a transformed mind (Romans 12:2), and then one day, become privileged with a newly designed body, a resurrected body (1Co 15:42 “So also is the resurrection of the dead.  The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.”)  Having a resurrected body, seems to be the final step in the path to perfection (1Co 15:53).  Practical perfection, not positional perfection which we receive at the moment of salvation (Colossians 2:10 “and you are complete in Him…”  ‘complete’  pleroo  full, complete, perfect)

God is Spirit and does not have a mortal human body like ours (John 4:24), and therefore has never possessed the capacity to sin. When He did become incarnate through Jesus, as Jesus, (1Tim 3:16  “God was manifested in the flesh” NKJV ), Deity dominated and the incarnate God could not and did not sin (Hebrews 4:15 “For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin’.).

Q. My husband of 13 years does not love me anymore to the point that he tried to kill me with one of his guns and bruised me up that day in front of our preschooler. On police advice, I filed a protective order against him and 2 weeks later I filed for divorce. I’m scared to stay married to him because I know he hates me. Do I have biblical grounds for divorce, or should I dismiss the filing on my next hearing?
First of all this is a delicate situation and one that requires sensitivity, compassion, and care. No one in their right mind would think that the situation at hand necessitates hanging around. Even if I didn’t know anything about God’s Word, and what it says about specific grounds for divorce, I would still tend to lean towards the side of caution here and tell you that this predicament is one that you or anyone else would want not to continue lingering in.
Biblical Grounds For Divorce
The great news is that the Bible is very clear and direct in stating what the grounds for divorce are. To help you easily remember them, they all start with the letter d. They are death (Romans 7:2-3); disloyalty (Matthew 19:3,9); and desertion (1 Corinthians 7:10-11). In all of these instances as seen in the above passages as well, the Bible supports and sanctions a remarriage.

But there seems to be a fourth reason that the Bible includes as grounds for a divorce. If we read again in 1 Corinthians chapter 7, we see from verses 10 and 11 this presented: “Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord:” (Meaning this was actually the instruction of Jesus while incarnate on earth)  “A wife is not to depart (the Greek word here is the word for divorce) from her husband”. That’s it…that was the teaching and the standard of Jesus. No divorce, sorry wives, no divorce.
What About Danger In The Marriage?
So the question enters, what if he is not unfaithful, and he hasn’t physically abandoned the marriage/family, but he is beating her up daily, or bringing drug dealers home, or pedophiles who are endangering the kids, or he is robbing banks etc…? The point is that there is a serious threat or danger within the marriage. “But even if she does depart (again, the same word: divorce).” What this is saying is that there will be instances for a woman divorcing a husband for a reasonable cause (danger). This is what Jesus is inferring. But there’s a qualifier: “Let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband”

She can divorce because of danger but has to remain unmarried. If he gets his act together, there may be hope for the marriage in the future.  So the wife can get out of the way of danger, but has to remain unmarried.  This qualifier keeps a wife from tossing her husband for a lesser reason (irritations).  Because if she did walk away for a lesser reason, she would not have true Biblical grounds for divorcing her husband.

So, the final analysis is that Jesus leaves room for a wife being able to terminate a marriage if she is any sort of perceived danger.

Q. What does God say about doctors and healing. I have many christian friends who say doctors are trying to imitate God and they are afraid of going to one saying they are a lack of faith in God. Are there any verses pertaining to this. I am deeply troubled because I am studying to become a doctor and I am a christian.
A casual research of the term “physician” will assist us with developing an understanding of doctors and medicine from God’s view point.
Old Testament View of Doctors
In Jeremiah 8:22, the prophet is noticeably upset about the spiritual state of Judah.  So he formats his communication to help us understand his concern.  He says…”Is there no balm (Hebrew:  tseriy / medicine) in Gilead, Is there no physician there?”  His point is, if there is medical, physical healing available in Judah, why isn’t there any spiritual healing and potential of recovery in that way?  Jeremiah viewed physicians and medicine as something positive.
Jesus’ View of Doctors
Jesus said in Matthew 9:12 “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick”.  The clear implication being, physicians benefit sick people. In Colossians 4:14, Luke is referred to by Paul as, “Luke the beloved physician”.  So, we see that, one of the human authors of a book of the New Testament was a medical doctor, and he was call beloved.

Mark 5:25-26 does tell the story about “a certain woman (who) had a flow of blood for twelve years, and had suffered many things from many physicians.  She had spent all that she had and was no better, but rather grew worse.” The message here is that sometimes…no matter how competent and how numerous the doctors and medicines are, they still will not be able to accomplish a cure.

In this situation, it provided the opportunity for Jesus to step in and preform a miracle.  But the overall message from the bible certainly does not depreciate or prohibit the use of medical doctors or medicine.

Q. Taking specifically into consideration 1 Peter 3:21, how do we get away with saying that we are only saved by belief and repentance?
In order to understand the entire context of 1 Peter 3:21, one cannot just take into consideration that lone verse, rather the verses preceding and succeeding it must be considered as well.

Verses 18-22 state: For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us–baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.

Peter delineates any confusion right on the top end when he places the focus on the work of Christ, who suffered once to bring us to God. We don’t bring ourselves to God, rather He does the bringing. The Bible does not contradict itself. If it says one thing (that salvation comes from the work of Christ only), then it can’t say another also (that man can work for his own salvation). Baptism is a work, therefore it cannot be included within the salvation process. Mark 1:15 and Acts 20:21 clearly state that we are saved by repenting and believing solely.

But what about this passage? Well, if the context is understood properly, water is actually referred to here as an instrument of judgment, not salvation. God’s patience wore thin after 120 years of allowing man to change His ways during the days that Noah spent building the ark. When the rebellion perpetuated, God judged the earth through water. The point that Peter makes is that God save Noah from the water, not through it. Then Peter goes on to speak of baptism, which is used in other contexts than just water in Scripture (i.e. 1 Cor 12:13: For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body…). Baptism means to be immersed. Just as we are immersed into the church by the Spirit as Paul tells us, Peter lets us know that through the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, we also are immersed into God’s family. Antitype is just a symbolic term used as an earthly expression for a heavenly reality. Peter is using symbolism. Basically, in no way is Peter saying baptism by water save us. He even clarifies by stating “not the removal of the filth of the flesh” (or through some act of cleansing by water), but by “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” Having a good conscience toward God cannot be accomplished by something that we do. It can only be accomplished through repentance and faith…from the working of Christ.

This passage can easily be deciphered when one uses a proper hermeneutic. Plainly stated, when we study the Bible, we must study it properly in order to be able to interpret it properly. If we look at the historical, grammatical, literary, and literal context, we can more easily identify with what the Biblical writers are saying.