Jeff wrote: I merely was responding to the broad brush general statements that I (& scripture & church history) do not agree with. While there may be error in the OP being addressed, the right Biblical solution is never an equal & opposite error on the other side that has no Biblical or historical balance. The answer to apparent so called Biblical contradictions is always "more Bible". The full sum of the whole counsel of scripture.While that passage/s (& others like it/them) does speak much on leaving worldly goods behind, you have to be intentionally ignoring the very clear statements about family (even wife specifically) or something? We are to never neglect our wife/family, while at the same time we are never to neglect the Lord, His Christ, His Gospel, His calling, etc. If the two seemingly "conflict", then what you're proposing is "choose family first", & I contend that the scriptures are crystal clear that our love & obedience doesn't contradict it, but "trumps" all. Jesus, the apostles, early church, much of the modern worldwide church, etc. were/are crystal clear on this both in doctrine & example.
No one said anything about disrespecting their wife (I sure didn't). But the issue is loving wife, children, brethren, neighbor, lost, etc. but all in secondary submission to our primary "first love" of Jesus preimmenently. This is what scripture clearly teaches in balance, doctrine & example.
Art Katz said one time in a message called "Daughters of Sarah" (based on the NT principle in scripture of this & being in submission, a husbands headship role in the family, a wife's Biblically ordained right response, etc.) a man & his wife came forward at the end of a meeting. The wife said "my husband thinks we are to sell our successful business & move our family to the mission field! I told him as soon as God tells me, then I'll go!" Art gracefully, "in an understanding way considering the wife as the weaker vessel" said, "o dear precious daughter: if the Lord has spoken to your husband, He has already spoken to & concerning you. God appointed Him over you under Himself." Our modern feminist cultural thinking from childhood doesn't like that, but it doesn't make it any less true.
Again, I'm not speaking to the OP & message AT ALL. Merely the "reactionary" over statements of broad brush generalizations that followed (that I already highlighted, particularly the Unbiblical in-historical view that missions should be for the single people & not the family). David Wilkerson preached & taught against this error in thinking. John Piper does. David Platt does. Art Katz did. The very lives of William Carey, Afonirum Judson, & countless others did. The teachings & examples of Jesus, the apostles, the early church, the modern historical church the world around, etc. speaks volumes otherwise. To emphatically presume to teach & say otherwise is not Biblical & a careless opinion & poor extraction of truth from scripture IMHO,
I didn't want to derail the other thread or leave this question unanswered.
Regarding the early church and apostles being married, the situation is rather different in that there was no-one else to go. Since that time, there have been plenty of people to go on mission.
It is not a matter of serving God or family - I just think that many who go and leave their families, are mistaken in thinking that God has called them, even Mark Greening who was obviously a godly man and anointed, made in my view and also Zsuzsanna's (thanks) the error that it was okay to stand his wife up on important occasions, once without even ringing her to cancel.
Is it not strange brethren, that these men often end up in broken marriages? Of course, some will blame the wives and say that they were not submitted to |God's calling on their husbands, but why should they not be allowed to disagree that their husbands had been called?
Most wives know their husbands much more than they know themselves. I do not accept that God will call a married man without letting his wife know of the calling to the mission field. That idea is reducing her to a piece of equipment.
I do not say that no married man will be called - in certain circumstances, no singles will be available and perhaps a woman will be needed on the field too. And even possibly that there might be young children involved.
But in this day and age, I believe that God will call people whilst they are at college and single and any so called calling oiutside of this should be treated with great caution and delay. I do believe that most callings take place in young people.
It is my opinion that many of these callings of married people were not from God. We often make mistakes over God's will for us - I have myself.