QUESTION
Since marriage only allows 2 people to get married. I would like to know of the Bible’s opinion of open marriages and engaging in homosexuality while in a marriage? I think that if anyone can not be committed to 1 person, they shouldn’t get married.

The ancient world had open marriages. The male was married, had concubines, and visited prostitutes. The New Testament offers a different way of viewing marriage, a different Story to live in if you please, one woman with a man or one man with a woman at a time. It seems clear that Scripture does not allow for any same sex relationships in or out of marriage. Read First Corinthians and Romans (especially the first couple of chapters) for Paul’s thoughts on the subject of same sex sexual relationships.

QUESTION and COMMENTARY
Can you please show me where in the Bible God tells a wife it’s OK to withhold sex from her husband. I know that a husband should do Eph 5:25, does it say that if he doesn’t at all times it’s OK for his wife to withhold sex? When I’m doing Eph. 5:25 and my wife still withholds sex it’s hard to continue with Eph 5:25, I do still try but I am only human and I am here in the flesh.

I have found that sex within marriage is not a negotiable thing, God says a husband and wife should satisfy each others sexual needs, (1 Corinthians 7.3). And not withhold sex only when both agree and for a time to pray and then resume their normal sexual relations with each other, and this should be on a regular basis.

However, if you cannot control your desires, you should get married. It is better for you to marry than to burn with sexual desire. (1 Corinthians 7.9).

I am married and still burn with sexual desire when my wife withholds. Did I miss something in God’s word or am I just stupid?

ANSWER
First, let me say that I have no reason to think that you are stupid!

Ephesians 5.25 does not have a sexual context. There is nothing in the text that speaks about the subject of sex.

Second, the 1 Corinthians passage does speak about marriage partners withholding sex during a specific time devoted to prayer, but then they should come back together. This passage is a correction to those in the church at Corinth who may have thought that once they had become Spirit filled they no longer had to involve themselves with mundane human stuff like sex. Paul writes to correct them. I don’t think that Paul is saying that every day that you are going to pray that mates should abstain from sexual intercourse.

As a pastor for many years, I know that sexual problems within a marriage are only a sign of deeper marriage problems. You might suggest that you both talk about what might be causing your wife’s response (remember, I am only hearing one side of the story here). Problems within a marriage are usually not one-sided and there is usually fault on both sides.

If you cannot talk about it in private between each other, you might want to seek professional help.

QUESTION
Where in the Bible did God appear as an angel?

ANSWER
I am not aware of any place where God appeared as an angel. Below is part of an article on angels in the OT from Dictionary of Paul and His Letters that might be helpful.

Angels in the OT and Judaism.
Although angels are frequently called “sent ones” in the OT, they may also be referred to as “holy ones,” “sons of gods,” “sons of God,” “hosts,” “ministers,” or in certain instances they may be given the title “commander,” Josh 5:14. Angels in the OT appear as messengers or representatives of the heavenly world, frequently sent by Yahweh himself. They are part of the created order and serve God’s purposes, assisting and carrying out important transactions between God and humans, but primarily between God and Israel. They mediate revelation (2 Kings 1:3), come to the assistance of individuals (Gen 16:9), are associated with manifestations of Yahweh (Gen 18; 32:1), serve as part of the heavenly council (Ps 89:6-9) and make up the heavenly army (Deut 33:2; Zech 1:11). An angel is sent to accompany and direct Israel through the wilderness journey (cf. Ex 23:23 and Ex 33:2), and an angel brings judgment against Jerusalem (2 Sam 24:16). In visionary and apocalyptic settings angels take on more distinct roles as manlike figures who guide the seer within visions and serve as interpreters (Ezek 40:3; Zech 1:7-17). In Daniel angels take on a variety of roles, the most notable being that of the great archangel Michael, the protector of Israel (Dan 10:13; 12:1).

The title “angel of the Lord” seems to refer to an angel of rank or stature who carries out special missions for Yahweh. Such an angel appears to Moses in the flaming bush (Ex 3:2), leads Israel out of Egypt and into the land of promise (cf. Josh 5:13-15 and Judg 2:1-5) and appears to Gideon (Judg 6:11) at an hour of crisis.

Jewish texts outside of the OT testify to an expanded understanding of the nature and role of angels in some sectors of Second Temple Judaism. Much of this was simply an extension and development of what was to be found in the OT. Angels protect individuals (1 Enoch 100:5), execute judgment (1 Enoch 56:1-8), act as heavenly scribes (Jub 1:27-29), populate the heavenly court (1 Enoch 14:18-24), take part in the heavenly liturgy (1 Enoch 61:9-13; 4Q400-407), come to the aid of Israel in warfare (3 Macc 6:18-21), are differentiated by rank and name (1 Enoch 61:10; 2 Enoch 20; T. Levi 3), and guide heavenly visions and interpret mysteries (1 Enoch 17-36). One notable new development is the notion of two opposing forces of angelic powers: a force of good angels led by God or an archangel, and a force of evil angels led by an evil angelic power known as Satan, Mastema or Belial.

QUESTION
Does the N.T. make a distinction between elders and pastors? What would be a good understanding of the function of elders in a local church? Part of what I’m trying see is what could be the appropriate boundaries for elders. Is this more situational and relational than doctrinal? Can you direct me to material I can read to gain a better understanding of the role and function of elders?

ANSWER
Elders (presbuteroi pres-bu-ter-oi) formed the government body of the Jewish congregations. The Jerusalem church under James was likely modeled after this pattern (Dunn. Jesus and the Spirit. 285). This word does not appear in Paul’s writings before 1, 2 Timothy and Titus.

Some other writers believe the Jerusalem church, under the leadership of James, was patterned after the synagogue with elders in leadership. If that is so, there is a direct tie to the apostles that would show continuity for this form of government as being the correct one. One may arrive at this conclusion if the presupposition is held that unity means conformity. Unity does not have to be regimented conformity. Both unity and diversity appear in Scripture. If unity and diversity are understood as a motif in Scripture, then there may have been two different styles of systems of government in the church. One may be called a Pauline functional type that was charismatic. The other an institutional style moving from function to form by the time of the Pastoral Letters. It has been suggested that the authorship of the letters to Timothy and Titus was an edited Paul, which leaned toward an institutional approach of church government that had developed by the time of the editing. What is more important than authorship of these letters is what they teach.

The letters written to Timothy and Titus may be the first illustrations of progressive institutionalizing which has affected every modern movement of spiritual renewal, usually in the second or third generation. By the time of Timothy and Titus, the freshness of the renewal experiences, which brought the movement about, had hardened into rigid set forms. The second and third generation leaders may have been less creative and sensitive toward the Spirit. They began to treat the experiences of the founding fathers as the faith. The teaching and experience of the founders become the sacred words, hallowed heritage, which are to be preserved, guarded, and handed on, but never revisited or reinterpreted. The present becomes only a channel whereby the religion of the past can be transmitted for the next generation in good order. The vitality of the founders usually disappears and the second generation tries what is not possible, to live out the past experience in the present. This has not fully happened in the letters to Timothy and Titus, but the processes are well-advanced and possibly irreversible (Dunn. Jesus and the Spirit. 349-350).

When Paul speaks of the work of associates and individuals within the New Testament Church, he consistently avoids these words (Dunn. Jesus and the Spirit. 285)

With only one exception (Phil. 1.1), Paul never addresses a single group of leaders or a specific class of people as the ones responsible to organize or provide for the spiritual well-being of others over whom they give oversight. The letter to the Corinthians would have been a perfect place for Paul to give specific directions to an individual leader or a group of leaders to solve the significant problems within the church. The fact that there was not such an individual leader or group of leaders may be a blunt implication that if leadership was going to be required, the Spirit would have to provide it (Dunn. Jesus and the Spirit. 285).

The point is that there does not appear to be a hierarchical system of church government appointed by Paul in the Corinthian church or any of his churches to which he could appeal for help in solving the problems. Paul was the leader of the church, but the instructions he wrote were given by the Spirit to the whole church to help them correct the problem. (Spiritual Gifts for Boneheads. Winn Griffin. Copyright 1999. 44-45)

I have also found The Emergence of the Church: Context, Growth, Leadership & Worship useful with this kind of question.