In 2 Corinthians 15:29, Paul utters a statement which is difficult to understand. He wrote: “Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they baptized for the dead?”

Many explanations have been given as to what Paul might have meant—some good, some not so good, and some blatantly wrong. We addressed some of those explanations in a Q&A, which was written in 2006, https://www.eternalgod.org/q-a-3014/, which had the following headline: “Would you please explain 1 Corinthians 15:29, speaking of ‘baptism for the dead. Are we to be baptized for those who have already died?”

In that Q&A, we showed that the concept, practiced by some, to baptize someone for a person who had died without having been baptized is totally unbiblical. We said: “This practice is not based on God’s Holy Word. Baptism only makes sense when and so long as the person to be baptized is ALIVE. Baptism for a dead person, that is, vicariously, derivatively or by proxy, accomplishes nothing.”

In this Q&A, we will explore additional possibilities as to what Paul might have meant, and elaborate on what we have stated in the above-quoted Q&A.

When it comes to “vicarious baptisms,” “The Annotated Bible” by John Henry Blunt, copyright 1932, points out the following:

“But there is no ground whatever for believing that vicarious baptisms were in use until some heretics of a much later date invented them, and justified their invention by this text (1 Corinthians 15:29).” In a footnote, the commentary stated: “The Montanists of the second century, and not a few orthodox but ill-informed Christians also of the same period, were accustomed to administer baptisms to those who had died unbaptized… and the practice of baptizing dead persons by proxy appears to have been adopted by the later Marcionites as an improvement upon the earlier custom.”

The Ryrie Study Bible adds that this view and practice is “heretical.”

Returning to our above-mentioned Q&A, we then explored the idea, advanced by some commentaries, that Paul might not have been talking about a practice in the Church, but by others outside the Church, in which some Church members participated. Paul allegedly made the argument that if even those people practiced baptism for the dead because they believed in a resurrection from the dead (compare verse 20), why wouldn’t the Corinthians do so. We said: “… some commentaries advance the idea that a few within the Corinthian Church might have been involved in the practice of getting baptized for a dead relative…. as Paul… used ‘they’ rather than ‘we’ when speaking of it… To deny the resurrection, as the Corinthians did, and yet be involved in such baptism activities made no sense.’”

This presupposes, of course, that such practice was indeed known to the Corinthians, which is doubtful in light of Blunt’s above-quoted statements. In addition, it is also doubtful that Paul would have referred to (pagan) practices outside the Church to prove the resurrection.

We also mentioned the opinion, advanced by some, that the Greek can also mean “baptized because of the dead,” i.e. the reference is to the baptism of those influenced by the testimony of a Christian who had recently died, and in the hope of being re-united with him at the resurrection. This opinion is also given, as a possibility, by the Ryrie Study Bible, and it has some merit. The MacArthur Study Bible states:

“A reasonable view seems to be that ‘people baptized’ refer to living believers who give outward testimony to their faith in baptism by water.. who had subsequently died. Paul’s point is that if there is no resurrection…, then why are people coming to Christ to follow the hope of those who have died?”

Finally, we explained that in the phrase in verse 29 (“baptized for the dead”), the word “for” is “huper” in the original Greek. This word can also mean, “for the hope of” or “for the realization of.”  1 Corinthians 15:29 can be translated: “Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for [the realization of, or the hope of] the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they baptized for [the realization of, or the hope of] the dead?”

We said: “When people were baptized, they were not dead, but still alive. At the time of their baptism, they were looking forward to their resurrection. Baptism was the first necessary step toward the realization of their goal–the resurrection of the dead. Without that hope, there would not have been a reason to be baptized in the first place. Subsequently those who were baptized died, sleeping in their graves and awaiting, in hope, so to speak, their resurrection from the dead.”

The Ryrie Study Bible offers another possibility as to how to understand this passage, which they describe as “most likely,” saying, “… it means being baptized in the place of those who had died; i.e., new converts taking the place of older ones who had died. Paul’s point is: unless one believes in the resurrection of the dead (rather than the Greek idea of ‘immortality’) what’s the point of such a practice?”

This is a valid observation. God’s Church will not die, and it has a Work to accomplish. Many have gone before us, doing their part of the Work, and have died. Others had to be appointed to take their place, to continue in the Work which has to be done. The Elberfelder Bible states in an annotation that the Greek word, translated “for,” can also mean “in place of.”  

There is, however, another and perhaps most plausible explanation as to what Paul might have meant, when talking about baptism for the dead. Baptism symbolizes our death. As we said in our above-mentioned Q&A: “As Romans 6:3-4 explains, baptism–the total immersion of the person under water–points at the figurative death of the person. He ‘dies,’ spiritually speaking, in the watery grave. His old man dies (verse 6), and a new man arises out of the watery grave (Colossians 3:9-10). In a sense, the new man is ‘resurrected,’ figuratively speaking, from the spiritual dead.”

So we were dead before our baptism. But notice what happened when we became baptized. Ephesians 2:1 says: “And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins…” Verses 5 and 6 continue: “… when we were dead in trespasses, [God] made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together…” And Ephesians 5:14 adds:“ Therefore He says: ‘Awake, you who sleep, Arise from the dead, And Christ will give you light.’”

The concept that we were dead in sin and are now alive, after having been properly baptized, is stated time and again in Scripture. We read in Romans 6:13:  “And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.”

Colossians 2:13 expresses the same thought: “And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses…”

The Bible explains that those who are not led by and have not received God’s Spirit, which is only given through the ritual of baptism, are “dead.” Christ said in Matthew 8:21-22: “Then another of His disciples said to Him, ‘Lord, let me first go and bury my father.’ But Jesus said to him, ‘Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead.’” Apparently, Christ was calling the person to the ministry, but he wanted to wait until his father had died, who was still alive but might have been advanced in years. Christ’s retort was that the time of the person’s calling was now, and that his spiritually “dead” relatives could look after and bury his spiritually “dead” father, once he had died.

We also find this statement in 1 Timothy 5:6: “But she who lives in pleasure is dead while she lives.”

Something similar might be expressed in 1 Peter 4:6, where we read: “For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.” This could refer to Christians who died after the gospel had been preached to and accepted by them; it could also refer to the spiritually “dead” who accepted the gospel when it was preached to them, following God in the spirit, while being condemned by [unconverted] men in the flesh.

Paul’s statement, then, that there is baptism for the dead is indeed to be applied to those being spiritually dead. Baptism is for them; they cease to be spiritually dead and become spiritually alive, as he explains in Ephesians 4:22-24:

“… put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and… put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.”

Let us conclude with these marvelous words by Paul in Romans 6:2-6:

“How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.”

We were dead, but through the “baptism for the dead” (that is, the baptism for us), we became alive, now waiting for the first resurrection when Christ returns.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Have you ever noticed an interesting phenomenon, when reading a passage in Revelation 22:19, depending on the translation you may use?

The New King James Bible states: “… if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” Similar to the Authorized Version and the German Luther Bibles from 1891, 1984, 2009 and 2017.

However, most translations render the verse in this way (using the New International Version as an example): “And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.”

Rather than saying, God shall take away his part from the “Book of Life,” they say, God will take away his share in the “Tree of Life.”

Both statements make sense. When somebody tempers with God’s Word, God may take away the Holy Spirit which had been given to the person (symbolized by the Tree of Life), and when that happens, his name will be blotted out from the Book of Life (symbolizing the gift of eternal life; Revelation 3:5). Such a person will not inherit eternal life (Hebrews 6:4-6, 9; 10:26-27). So we see that the warning in Revelation 22:19 is extremely severe.

Still, can we determine which rendering is correct? Could it even be possible that the translation of the Authorized Version, the King James Bible and the Luther Bibles is incorrect?

To trace the history as to how and why the translations were included in the King James and Luther Bibles is a fascinating story. But before exploring this, let us consider a few examples where the King James and Luther Bibles ADDED disputed passages which should have been left out, or OMITTED passages which should have been included.

One example is Matthew 28:19.

In our Q&A, “Why do you not baptize by using the words, ‘I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost’? (Part 3),” we pointed out that many have questioned the authenticity of Matthew 28:19, which is contained in the King James  and  Luther Bibles, concluding that it was a later addition which was not part of the original New Testament.

We stated the following, among other things:

“David Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary, states on page 86: ‘Although nearly all ancient manuscripts have the trinitarian formula, Eusebius, the church historian [who died in 340 AD] … in his writings preceding the council of Nicea in 325 C.E., quotes the verse without it.’…

“Fred C. Conybeare, ‘The Eusebian Form of the Text Mt. 28, 19,’ in ‘Zeitschrift fuer die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde des Urchristentums,’ (1901), pointed out that Eusebius had quoted Matthew 28 seventeen times [others say, eighteen times] BEFORE the Council of Nicea, OMITTING the disputed words, and three times AFTER the Council of Nicea, including the disputed words (at p. 282). He also stated on pages 284-287: ‘[Neither Clement of Alexandria nor Origen give any] hint of the important precept to baptize in the triune name which in our texts intervene…’

“E.W. Bullinger writes in ‘Word Studies on the Holy Spirit,’ on pages 47-49: ‘It is difficult to suppose that there would have been this universal disregard of so clear a command (in Matthew 28:19), if it had ever been given; or if it ever really formed part of the primitive text. It is a question therefore whether we have here something beyond the reach of science, or the powers of ordinary Textual Criticism. As to the Greek MSS, there are none beyond the fourth century, and it seems clear that the Syrian part of the church knew nothing of these words. Eusebius quotes this verse no less than eighteen times, and always quotes it in this form, ‘Go ye into all the world and make disciples of all nations.’ He omits the reference to ‘baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.’ Now, Eusebius, the great Ecclesiastical historian, died in 340 AD, and his work belonged, therefore, in part to the third century. Moreover, he lived in one of the greatest Christian libraries of that day. If the Greek MS there contained these words, it seems impossible that he could have quoted this verse eighteen times without including them.

“Professor Lake… and Mr. Conybeare have called attention to this fact, and shown that neither Justin Martyr (who died in 165 AD), nor Aphraates of Nisibis (who flourished in Syria, 340 AD), knew nothing of these words. It looks, therefore, as though the words got into the text (perhaps from the margin) in the church of North Africa; and that the Syrian Churches did not have them in the MSS at their disposal. The point is interesting. The difficulty is there.”

The Church of the Eternal God takes the approach that even IF the passage in Matthew 28 is genuine, it does not set forth a formula which needs to be used when baptizing a person. Therefore, Church ministers, following the example of the early apostles, are baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ and, with the laying on of hands, are asking the Father to give the baptized person the Holy Spirit. But more likely than not, the passage in Matthew 28:19 does not appear to be genuine, which would mean that it was inserted in the Bible without authority.

There is another famous example where a verse was added which does clearly not belong in the Bible. We are referring to 1 John 5:7-8. The disputed passage can be found in the King James Bible, as well as in the Luther Bible of 1891. However, it has been omitted in the Luther Bible of 1984 and in all subsequent editions, except for the neue Lutherbibel 2009 which has still retained it. 

Quoting from our booklet, “IS God a Trinity?”:

“The New King James Bible translates it this way: ‘For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.’

“… most scholars agree that the words in verse 7, ‘in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one,’ were later added by the Catholic Church to ‘prove’ the Trinity, and that these words were not in the original writings. Many Bible translations and commentaries state that this particular phrase, referred to as the ‘Comma Joanneum,’ is ‘not contained in the best authorities and constitutes a late addition in the Latin Text’ [Pattloch Bible, Appendix, page 85].

“The Zürcher Bible comments in a footnote that ‘this passage was added in the fourth century in the Latin Text, and only in the 15th century in some Greek Texts.’ The NIV adds in a footnote that this particular phrase is only contained ‘in the late manuscripts of the Latin Bible and that it is not found in any Greek manuscripts before the 16th century.’ Other commentaries point out that these words are clearly a falsification and that they have therefore been correctly omitted, even as a footnote, in many modern translations.”

In another example, we find that a verse in Matthew 27:49 was left out which needs to be included, but neither the King James Bibles nor the Luther Bibles include it.

In our Q&A, titled, “How, exactly, did Jesus Christ die? Why did a soldier pierce Him with a spear when He was already dead?”, we said the following:

“When we read Matthew’s account, in the New King James Bible, we will not find exactly how Christ died. The reason is that this translation omits a crucial verse, at the end of Matthew 27:49. Several translations, as well as many old manuscripts, have retained this missing verse. For instance, verses 49 and 50 read in the Moffat translation: ‘But the others said, “Stop, let us see if Elijah does come to save him!” (Seizing a lance, another pricked [better, pierced] his side, and out came water and blood.) Jesus again uttered a loud scream, and gave up his spirit.’

“The Fenton Bible translates the missing verse as follows: ‘But another taking a spear pierced His side, when blood and water came out.’

“A.T. Robertson, Harmony of the Gospels, states in a footnote to Matthew 27:49: ‘Many ancient authorities add: And another took a spear and pierced his side, and there came out water and blood.’

“The Revised Standard Version, and the New Revised Standard Version, add the following footnote: ‘Other ancient authorities insert, And another took a spear and pierced his side, and out came water and blood.’

“The Vaticanus–a Greek New Testament written in the 300’s A.D.–contains the missing verse as well. It reads: ‘And another took a spear and pierced his side and there came forth water and blood.’ The Sinaiticus Codex also contains the verse, and so does the Codex Ephraemi. According to The Testament in Greek, by Wescott and Hort, published in 1896, the missing verse also appears in most Syrian, Egyptian, Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic translations. It also appears in Origen’s work [around 200 A.D.]. Walton’s Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, published in 1657, claims, in Vol. VI, on page 6 of the appendix, that this missing verse was still a marginal reading of the Greek text when the King James Version was made.”

“Do we know WHY the inspired passage in Matthew 27:49 was deleted from the sacred text? The deletion occurred when a spurious version of the book of Matthew, which was allegedly written by Barnabas, was found, which did not include the passage in Matthew 27:49. Note the following excerpts from Westcott and Hort: ‘In a letter partially preserved in Syriac… [Severus] mentions the reading [of the missing passage] as having been vigorously debated at Constantinople in connexion with the matter of the patriarch Macedonius, when the… [spurious] copy of… Matthew’s Gospel said to have been discovered in Cyprus with the body of… Barnabas in the reign of Zeno (?477) was consulted and found not to contain the sentence in question … at Constantinople the holy Gospels were by command of the emperor censored,’ and the passage in question was deleted from the sacred text of the gospel according to Matthew.”

We also then explained the Scripture in John 19:32-34, which, correctly translated, supports not only the conclusion as to how Christ died (a soldier killed Him by piercing His side with a spear), but also, that the missing verse in Matthew’s account needs to be included in the Bible.

So we have seen that on a few occasions, crucial verses were omitted or added in the King James and Luther Bibles, while other translations or commentaries, based on historical records, clarify that situation.

Returning now to Revelation 22:19, let us explore what happened when the rendering “Book of Life” was used—as distinguished from “Tree of Life.”  

We should first of all notice that the Authorized Version and also the Luther Bible are based on Erasmus’s Greek New Testament and Latin translations. It is interesting that we do not know of ANY Greek manuscripts at the time before Erasmus which has the wording “book of life.” They all say “tree of life.”  

When in 1515 and 1516, Erasmus worked on the Greek New Testament, he had only access to a manuscript from the 12^th century. It is today preserved in the university library in Augsburg. In that manuscript, the last five verses of Revelation 22 were missing. Erasmus was pressed for time, as the demand for a Greek New Testament was great, and he wanted to be the first to publish it (as others in Spain were also working on a Greek New Testament edition). So, Erasmus used the commonly used Latin text (the Vulgata) of Revelation 22:16-21 and translated that back into the Greek.

He clearly revealed in writing what he had done in his annotation to the New Testament, stating in Latin: “Quamquam in calce hujus libri, nonnulla verba reperi apud nostros, quae aberant in Graecis exemplaribus, ea tamen ex latinis adiecimus.” (In English: “Even though I found at the end of this book some words, which were missing in the Greek manuscripts, we still added them from the Latin manuscripts.”) He confirmed this again in a subsequent letter: “Proinde nos ne hierat lacuna, ex nostris Latinis supplevimus Graeca.” (In English: “So that we should not have a loss, we supplemented the Greek (words) from our Latin (manuscripts).”    

The Latin text had indeed “libro vitae,” i.e., book of life. It does not appear that Erasmus’ subsequent editions corrected or changed this rendition, and so it was used by the King James and Luther Bibles as the basis for their translations into English and German. But it does not appear that this is the correct translation, and it appears that Revelation 22:19 should indeed be rendered to say that God will take away the TREE of life from the person who deletes Scriptures, obviously not inadvertently, but with full knowledge and intent.

We want to conclude with a quote from chapter 2 of our free booklet, “The Authority of the Bible :

“While using [different] types of translations when studying the Bible can be beneficial, only literally translated editions—such as the New King James Bible (for English)—should be depended upon for doctrinal clarity. Even so, there may be errors due to inaccurate translation. It is, therefore, necessary and important that a faithful minister of God explain and correct such errors (compare Romans 10:14–15).”

This Q&A served to do this in regard to Revelation 22:19.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Many years ago, I heard an interesting sermon by a minister of the (now defunct) Worldwide Church of God, in which he applied many passages in Ephesians 4 and 5 to the Christian marriage. I took notes (still in my possession) and have thought about this concept many times. I do not remember the minister’s name, but I do remember his message.

Using some of those interesting thoughts, and elaborating on them, let us review in this Q&A some of Paul’s statements in Ephesians 4 and 5, which definitely have meaning, application to, and relevance for a successful marriage.

Ephesians 4:14-15 reads:

“… that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ…”

Applying this passage to a Christian marriage, we are admonished not to be unstable, unreliable or unsettled, and we should not always be ruled by emotions (one is glad and happy at one moment, and then sad and upset the next moment). This also includes the directive to speak the Truth in love—and not in anger and with a desire to get back at our mate. Even telling the Truth can be wrong and it can hurt our mate unnecessarily, when it is done with false motives and not with love (which is outgoing concern for the welfare and benefit of others). The Truth told in love can hurt too, even if it is told with the desire to help one’s mate. It may take great wisdom and discernment to make the right distinction and decision in that regard. We are to become like Christ who never hurt another person unnecessarily.

Ephesians 4:17, 22 continues:

“This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind… that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts…”

We are told not to live any longer like those in the world with foolish and ungodly desires and deceitful lusts. We all did so in the past, but we need to get rid of such conduct and behavior, as it will destroy our marriage.  

Ephesians 4:25-27 states:

“Therefore, putting away lying, ‘Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,’ for we are members of one another. ‘Be angry, and do not sin’: do not let the sun go down on your wrath, nor give place to the devil.”

Nothing can destroy our marriage faster than lying to our mate. You might recall this famous analogy: Each lie is like a stone which becomes part of a wall. This wall grows higher with every lie, until the wall is so high that we cannot climb it anymore or jump over it. The two mates are separated without coming together again. The same applies to anger. We must control our emotions, as we already pointed out. There is a time for righteous anger, but even then, it must be controlled and must not linger. The goal must be to bring about reconciliation “before the sun sets.” A problem should be resolved immediately or as soon as possible, because if we wait too long, Satan is right there to influence us to believe that it is alright to stay angry and even to develop hate for our mate. His desire is to destroy our marriage, and we must not let that happen.

Ephesians 4:28 continues:

“Let him who stole steal no longer, but rather let him labor, working with his hands what is good, that he may have something to give him who has need.”

It should be self-evident that we are not to steal from our mate. In many, if not most cases, a couple has all things in common, so how could we possibly steal from our mate? One way would be to buy, secretly, things we do not need or should have, and of which our mate would not approve.

Ephesians 4:29 says:

“Let no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers.’

We should try to refrain from making rude and offensive comments which our mate does not appreciate. Otherwise, we will cause unnecessary offense, which needs to be avoided so as not to jeopardize the well-being of our marriage. 

Ephesians 4:31-32 continues:

“Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice. And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just as God in Christ forgave you.”

Bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil and malicious speaking to and about our mate could all lead to the destruction of our marriage. This includes the tendency to bring up things from the past which should have been resolved, forgiven and forgotten. It is always wrong to “make a mountain out of a molehill.” Rather, even in times of stress, disappointment, disagreement and quarrels, we must be kind and tenderhearted to one another, willing to forgive and to forget. It has been said that the success of a Christian marriage (with both parties being converted) may be an indicator of the depth of our conversion.

Ephesians 5:3 states:

“But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints…”

As married couples, we must stay away from and flee adultery (fornication being a violation of God’s Law committed by two unmarried people, while adultery describes a situation where at least one party is married). Adultery is related to covetousness, as an adulterer covets the wife or husband of his or her neighbor or another person. Such conduct is absolutely not fitting for converted Christians, and adultery may constitute a biblical ground for divorce.

Ephesians 5:6 continues:

“Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.”

In the context of marriage, we are not to listen to foolish “advice” or persuasions from our “friends,” who might say: “You can do this. Sleep with him or her. No problem. Your mate won’t find out about it.”

Ephesians 5:11 says:

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.”

Such friends, as described above, are not real friends at all. They should be avoided. Our fellowship with darkness—with people who are not good for us—might lead to unsolvable problems in a marriage. We need to therefore evaluate whether our close contact with certain people is in fact healthy. Once we “expose” our contact and find that it is not fruitful, but leads to conduct we should not be engaged in, we need to break up such relationships.

Ephesians 5:16 reads:

“… redeeming the time, because the days are evil.”

We are to be careful that we do not waste our time on unprofitable things which, in the context of our marriage, alienate our relationship with our mate; especially, when one mate may approve of those things, while the other mate may not. Rather than doing things on our own, we ought to find ways to do things of common interest together.

Ephesians 5:18 continues:

“And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit…”

Another sure factor contributing to the destruction of a marriage is the improper use of alcohol. Consuming alcohol modestly is not wrong—Paul even encouraged Timothy to drink a little wine because of his frequent sicknesses (1 Timothy 5:23)—but to drink too much, and that on a continued basis, may well ruin the marriage relationship. Some who are drunk become very aggressive; others become silly and unresponsive. That could be an embarrassment to the sober mate; especially, when it occurs in public. A person loving his or her mate will do everything he or she can to overcome his or her alcoholism.

Ephesians 5:19-20 states:

“… speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…”

Our focus should be on the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, and a Christian marriage will be guided by principles and conduct which are in harmony with God’s Word and not contrary to it.  Sinful conduct will have its automatic consequences for a marriage, and even if both parties consent to such conduct, if it is wrong, the punishment will follow swiftly (Galatians 6:7-8).

Ephesians 5:21 states:

“… submitting to one another in the fear of God.”

One of the most important keys to a successful and happy marriage is to look after and consider the interests of our mate and not only our own interests (Philippians 2:3-5). When both mates do this, then a harmonious relationship will result. Also, the following verses deal with the conduct and responsibilities of the husband to his wife; and of the wife to her husband. If both treat each other in a godly manner, then the lasting success of a Christian marriage is so much more secure.

Ephesians 5:33 concludes:

“Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”

In this verse, Paul summarizes the important instruction by emphasizing the two major facts of a marriage (i.e., the husband loves his wife and the wife respects her husband), which might determine whether a marriage will or will not succeed.

We say this in our free booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families”:

“Unless we walk in the ‘fear of God’ and ‘in love’ toward the other person, any role carried out, even if done perfectly according to the letter, will not produce a happy marriage. Further, we must concentrate on how to carry out our roles. We must do so as ‘wise’ persons—not as fools—and we must try to find out what the ‘will of God’ is in any given situation—not, what we may want to do. Finally, we must make the best use of the ‘time’ that God has given us—again, using our time to the glory of God and in submission to His will, not to ours. In doing that, we will ‘walk in love’—in love toward God and in love toward our mate.

“And if we walk in this kind of love, we will be able to ‘submit one to another.’ That is, we will be looking at the interests and needs of the other person—not just at what we may be interested in. Submitting one to another does not mean that we have anarchy—no leadership whatsoever—but it does mean that the one who is to lead is the one who is expected to serve the most…”

The booklet then sets forth many principles of righteous living which must be followed by both marriage partners to guarantee a successful lasting marriage. Please read or re-read our free booklet, and better yet, if you do not have one already, please order your free personal copy so that you can mark those passages which are most important for and applicable to you.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link