Man can, at times, readily recognize problems that arise, but often initially reacts with solutions to remove the problem out of sight. As the disciples looked out over the multitude in today’s passage, they saw thousands in a desert place with a lack of provisions. They quickly viewed what seemed to them as an insurmountable problem. As evening approached, they came to the Lord and suggested that He send the people away. The disciples were more comfortable with the problem if it was out of sight, out of mind, and not theirs to face. Their suggestion was an unacceptable solution. For this reason, the Lord put the problem back upon the disciples when He said to them, “Give ye them to eat” (Mark 6:37). In other words, the problem would not go away or solve itself. The Lord directed the disciples to find a solution and their turning a blind eye was completely unacceptable.
Problems are a reality of life. The Lord cautioned concerning this truth when He said, “In the world ye shall have tribulation” (John 16:33). Simon Peter echoed this sentiment when he said, “Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you” (1 Peter 4:12). Problems, trials, and tribulations occur because of sin’s presence, and so long as sin remains within this world, men will face difficulties. Though the nature of these problems varies, the foundational solutions are the same: problems must be faced, and spiritual, scriptural solutions must be sought. Failure to do so only increases the presence and impact of the problems.
The Lord gave specific commandments to both the husband and the wife. The Lord, knowing that man’s foremost love was, by nature, himself, commanded the man to “love” his wife as Christ loved the church (Ephesians 5:25). Additionally, the Lord, knowing that a woman would not naturally desire to submit, commanded the wife to submit to her own husband, as unto the Lord. This does not suggest that she only goes along with her husband so long as she agrees with his decisions, neither does it mean that she can never offer input into the decision-making process. But, in the end, she follows her husband’s leading, trusting the Lord to bless her faithfulness.
The Bible shows us that even heathen kings know it is proper for a woman to honour her husband. Some might suggest that because these words were spoken by a heathen, the reader should discount them, but these truths are supported elsewhere in scripture. For instance, Ephesians 5:33 says that the wife is to reverence her husband. Sara honoured Abraham, even to the point of calling him lord (1 Peter 3:6). Even Abigail, who had a husband that was a man of Belial, honoured her husband when she kept David from ending Nabal’s life (1 Samuel 25:23-33). A woman who honours her husband honours the Lord. She does so because the Lord commands it, not because her husband necessarily deserves her honour.
A normal man naturally desires to protect what God has given to him. Jacob was not always the best example of godliness, but he had the right desire to protect his family from harm. The Bible reveals to us how he reacted when he could see his brother Esau approaching. Unsure of how this reunion might disintegrate into harm, Jacob divided his family with the most precious at the rear. As his family’s protector, Jacob led the caravan. If there was going to be trouble, he would have an opportunity to intervene offering his family an opportunity to flee for safety. According to Ephesians 5:25, a man’s protection should include a willingness to lay down his life for his wife. A godly man will always intercede between his home and the impending danger.
The Bible explicitly emphasizes the spiritual responsibility of providing for one’s family. Sometimes believers wrongfully distinguish between the ministry work and any so-called secular work, but both are accomplished scripturally and prayerfully to please the Lord. 1 Timothy 5:8, in the direct context, deals with the responsibilities of providing for a household member who is a widow; yet, the emphasis upon “those of his own house” broadens the scope. A man who fails or refuses to provide for the needs of his family has “denied the faith” and said to be “worse than an infidel.” That is certainly a stiff and stern rebuke. It remains the man’s responsibility to provide for his family regardless of how far societal norms move away from God’s precepts. This does not mean that the woman cannot assist in the provision (Proverbs 31:13-16) but that the responsibility still belongs to the man.
As the head of the home, the man bares the responsibility for the biblical training of every individual within his home. Yet, many homes today have no man in them. Regardless of society’s disintegration, there is never a time when the man ever relinquishes his accountability to God as the spiritual leader of his home. In today’s passage, we read of Abraham bearing his personal responsibility. According to God’s testimony, Abraham bore that responsibility well. The Lord testified that Abraham would command his children and household after him. Abraham’s family would keep the way of the LORD and would do justice and judgment. Unfortunately, the same cannot be expressed for far too many modern Christian homes. In fact, church pews are overflowing with faithful women while their men are absentee husbands expressing little to no interest in the things of God.
Meddling in the problems of others is a dangerous practice resulting in unforeseen outcomes. The Bible uses two comparisons to help convey the danger involved with meddling. Proverbs 17:14 compares meddling to the letting out of previously restrained water. The idea is that meddling with the problems belonging to others is like personally opening the gates once restraining a large body of water. The second comparison is found in Proverbs 26:17. The Bible says, “He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.” When someone does this, the dog turns upon the individual. Both of these warnings demonstrate the grievous dangers involved in unnecessarily meddling in the affairs of others.
As Necho, king of Egypt, was on his way to fight against Carchemish, king Josiah of Judah came out against him for battle. Necho assured Josiah that the battle did not involve Judah and that the Lord had commanded him to make haste against the house of Carchemish. In order to turn Josiah’s intervention, Necho reminded Josiah that his intervention would be meddling with the will of God. Josiah refused to listen to the warning and meddled in these matters costing him his life (2 Chronicles 35:22-24). Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, expressed a similar statement when he told his peers that they should let the apostles alone lest they fight against God (Acts 5:34-39).
Loyalty is a godly trait, and like most godly traits, difficulties can accompany it. The story of David and Uriah serves as a prime example. David sinned against the Lord when he committed adultery with Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife. His actions caused her to become expectant with child. In an attempt to cover his wickedness, he sent for Uriah, his faithful soldier. David knew that his only opportunity to hide his sin from man was for Uriah to go home to Bathsheba. However, Uriah was a faithful soldier. He simply refused to enjoy the comforts of being with his wife while his fellow soldiers were enduring the hardness of battle. Uriah instead chose to sleep at the door of the king’s house. This loyalty caused David to reevaluate his devious plan and escalate the consequences. He decided to order Uriah to the hottest part of the battle insuring certain death. It was not just the enemy that killed Uriah, but also his loyalty to an unfaithful man!
