|
| |
Isn't adultrey grounds for divorce? |
|
|
|
Hosea
|
| |
Why would God allow Hosea to stay in a marriage when the wife was prostitute? Isn't adultery grounds for divorce? |
| |
Isn't adultrey grounds for divorce? |
|
|
|
Hosea
|
| |
Yes, in the N.T. grounds for divorce are limited to sexual immorality (adultery, fornication) and desertion. In both the O.T. and N.T., divorce is PERMITTED, but not COMMANDED. "Therefore, God would allow Hosea to stay in that marriage. . . . .'They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?" He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way' (Matt 19:7-8 NASB). In regard to your question, the key word in verse 8 is "permitted". The Jewish religious leaders used the word "command", but Jesus used the word "permit". |
| |
Wife or wives? |
|
|
|
Deut 7:3
|
| |
No that's not true. You can only have one wife now. He allowed in the OT to populate the world. Now in the NT (the covenant that we are under) we can only have one husband or wife. Read the gospels where it talks about this and Epesians 5:22-25. I know some religions still believe in the wives thing but that is called adultery now. I hope that helps. |
| |
Is any type of contraception allowed? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Dear JMR, Good question! I don't think that the Bible expressly prohibits the use of contraceptives, BUT, it is the attitude of the user that is in question. If used for the purpose of 'safe sex' because you are not sure of your partner, God cannot be pleased with the attitude. This includes promiscuous sex, adultery, harlotry, homosexuality, pre-marital (trial) sex, etc. Another abuse would be selfish, such as, "kids would detract from my plans, my career, or even my ministry." The key word is 'MY.' If, however, you have a normal, healthy, natural Christian life, and decide that your family is complete, and that (to a certain degree, and led by the Holy Spirit) age, finances, marital unity, logic, etc. lead you to want to stop proliferation, I cannot see God saying either, "Take a chance on another child," or "Stop having sex with your mate." Another factor,of course,is your gender. A man seems to be able to be more legalistic about this than a woman. He doesn't have to bear the child, nor does he have (usually) as much responsibility in rearing them. The only 'pro-choice' (in this matter) that is Biblical is that a woman should have a say in how many. I belong to the former gender, but can see the latter's point of view. Finally the method of contraception is also important. Abortion is absolutely out! Some drugs are potentially dangerous, and operations are permanent. Great caution is necessary, as well as spiritual and medical counsel. As to Biblical support for my thinking, I don't think that it was an issue, as there were not many forms available. As abortion and some very dangerous concoctions were the only real options, it is no wonder that God did not speak in favor of these methods. I would be interested to hear, in the light of these comments, views from the 'other side.' I am sure there are some who would say the Bible forbids contraception, but I suspect that the view is a bit legalistic or assumptive. I pray that this portrays, if nothing else, a good argument based on my understanding of the intent of God toward us. Blessings in Jesus' name. |
| |
Why the 7th day bent? |
|
|
|
Col 2:16
|
| |
In the beginning,God created heaven and the earth in 6 literal days, on the 7th day He rested, and made this day Holy. God new that man needed a day of rest (sabbath means rest) to renew,rest,worship and remember Him as God and creator. God reaffirmed this to Moses with the ten commanment law written with His own finger,engraved in stone.(the only scripture that was not given through men).
What day is the Sabbath day? Saturday. Read the account of the crucifixion in the book of Luke. Christ was crucified on Friday( the preperation day),rested on the sabbath day in the tomb,(saturday),and arose on the first day of the week(sunday). Christ kept the sabbath,even in his death. The apostles kept the sabbath,even Paul. He taught the Jews and the Gentiles alike on the sabbath day.
Sould we keep the Sabbath today? Yes! I challenge anyone to show me from scripture where God changed the day to sunday.(first day of the week)
How did the change take place? Study chruch history. It happened during roman times when the church and government became one. During the reign of Constintine,(a pagan and nominal christian), who worshiped the sun.there festival day was sunday (the venerable day of the sun).In order to unite the empire,with the churches apostasy,to incorporate the pagans into the chruch (along with many of there practices and idol worship),the day was slowly changed to sunday.
Will we keep the Sabbath in the future? Read the book of Isa.66th chapter.verses22-23. Yes we will.
Gods ten commandment laws have not changed nor will they change.
Was this part of the law given by inspiration through Moses? No. the mosaic law and ordinances were nailed to the cross with Christ. He was the fulfilment of these. The Sabbath is Gods seal ( as mentioned many times in scripture) His rightful
claim as God and creator. How can someone justify pulling the 4th commandment out of the ten commandments and and deceide not to keep that one command. Would it be ok to not keep "thou shalt not Murder",or say "thou shalt no commit adultery"
its that one ok not to keep. You can try and explain it away anyway you like. The facts are as they stand.Sunday keeping is a product of man,not Gods plan for us.
|
| |
what God says about divorse/remarriage |
|
|
|
Matt 5:31
|
| |
Matthew 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Jesus said that there was no excuse for divorce except adultery being committed. If you both are Christians then you must believe that it is God who has joined you together and no man must put that joining asunder.
Paul spoke of one other reason for divorce which is if a believer is married to an unbeliever, and the unbeliever wishes to leave the marriage then it is alright to do so.
1 Corinthians 7:11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
I am quite sure that God would not have instructed your wife to obtain a divorce, and for her to say so goes against all scripture relating to marriage instituted by God.
|
| |
What unmarried sexual acts are sinful? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
"... but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you.... If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you...." Matthew 5:28-30
The issue is not primarily one of action alone but one of willful inclination, attitude and thought. Just as pusuing adulterous thoughts equals adultery, pursuing thoughts about intercourse outside of marriage equals fornication. Likewise, willfully placing oneself in a position of temptation and-or stimulation of sexual hunger is sin. I can not claim to be without sin in this regard. However, that doesn't change the gravity of the act. We are to "flee immorality" even above other sins (1 Cor 6:18) and to "flee from youthful lusts" (2 Tim 2:22).
Of course there is forgiveness for the person who has already foolishly done this and repentantly comes to God seeking transformation (1 Jn 1:9); You (like myself or any other repentant sinner who comes humbly to Christ in confession and repentance) are currently purified from past sins. However, this is never an excuse for deliberately moving away from God by going down the road of chosen disobedience and pursuit of temptation (Gal 5:13).
God gives grace to deliver us from naturally occurring temptations, but this includes waiting expectantly for the way of escape and taking it as soon as it becomes available (1 Cor 10:13). The best route is always to avoid temptation. There is no simple set of rules of conduct as to what is safe and what is not. The effect on the conscience and the pusuit of the excitement of temptation is not identical for everyone, and it's easy to rationalize away the sins that others can't see. Based on reports of my own and others' personal experience, I'm convinced that it is specifically the stimulation of this "sexual enticement and excitement" (either in oneself or in one's partner) that makes most (physical or fantasized) out-of-wedlock sexual contact attractive.
As an additional note, seeking to stimulate urges in another is no less sinful than doing it in oneself. "It is inevitable that stumbling blocks come, but woe to him through whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea, than that he would cause one of these little ones to stumble. Be on your guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him." (Luke 17:1-3). This passage also assumes close enough relationships with brothers as to allow accountability; this is a big help in such situations. Be careful to seek counsel from people with holy and repentant lives and not to look for counsel that merely affirms the decisions you are considering; this is not a natural thing to do when facing appealing temptations.
Take heart. Holiness is a blessing, not a curse, and God has provided access to all you need for long-term and lasting victory.
" No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it. 1 Corinthians 10:13 |
| |
Should women be teaching in churches? |
|
|
|
1 Tim 2:12
|
| |
Paul often admists that what he writes is his opinion. The Judeo-Mesopotamian culture dictated men's superiority. The Patriarchal Church has taken the culture of thousands of years ago and tried to make it "God Breathed" for our direction, admonition and edification. The culture of the Mesopotamians should ahve been relegated to the same status as the law, however, men have been in control for centuries and have perpetuated the pain suffered by the women of antiquity. Galations 3:28 - "for in Christ Jesus there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free."
We must read the Bible in context and regard God's actions in the Old Testament as the history of His movement toward the grace of His Son Jesus Christ.
The requirement for man is to Love God and Love His Fellow Man. We are not to keep rules to find favor with God. Keeping women under our thumb is one of those rules that is similar to "the law." Read God's word for principles and not for literalism.
It is much harder for mankind to follow Jesus Christ and to respond naturally to Him instead of trying to measure up by following the rules. The law says do not kill, Jesus says "do not hate." The law says do not commit adultery, Jesus says "do not lust." Following Christ is a much harder task that following the rules of the law keepers and literalists.
Paul continuosly elevated women in his teachings, although it seems harsh to us today. When Christ came to the earth, many Jews were still practicing polygamy and the gentiles practiced it freely. A woman had no rights in either Jewish or Greek culture. They could be sold into slavery or even killed with no impunity for the husband if they were caught in the act of adultery. Women could not own property or sue in courts. It took two women witnesses to equal the witness of one man.
We men must elevate women continuously. We must model Christ's respectful and loving treatment of women. God gave them equal rights, it is not for us (or Paul) to take away....
Women are equal to men. Women can teach, preach, and in many cases better than a man...
Marriage is best served if there is mutual submission by each partner. If the literal interpretation of Ephesians 5:22 is followed, marriages are doomed unless the women has no self respect or does not wish to be free from the yoke of Patriarchal, Judeo-Mesopotamian slavery.
|
| |
marriages begun in adultery blessed??? |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
I would like to know what the Bible has to say about remarriage when the two people were in adultery and caused the break up the first marriage and the woman also became pregnant while the man was still married, the two that were committing adultery were supposedly Christians, they are now married and have a child concieved out of adultery and caused the former wife untold grief. If God is a loving caring God why does it seem that the faithful wife has been left alone while the ex husband seemingly has a new wife new child new home and doing quite well, what does the bible have to say about this? |
| |
marriages begun in adultery blessed??? |
|
|
|
Matt 12:31
|
| |
I would like to know what the Bible has to say about remarriage when the two people were in adultery and caused the break up the first marriage and the woman also became pregnant while the man was still married, the two that were committing adultery were supposedly Christians, they are now married and have a child concieved out of adultery and caused the former wife untold grief. If God is a loving caring God why does it seem that the faithful wife has been left alone while the ex husband seemingly has a new wife new child new home and doing quite well, what does the bible have to say about this? |
| |
marriages begun in adultery blessed??? |
|
|
|
Matt 12:31
|
| |
What does the Bible have to say about this?
. . . God forgives. Let him. There is only one unforgivable sin and it is neither divorce nor suicide.
. . . It would serve no purpose to dissolve the subsequent marriage. Whoever did that would be adding sin upon sin.
. . . On the other hand, Grace is not a license to sin (Rom 6:1 and following), as Paul and so many others have been falsely accused of teaching.
. . . Yet, though God does forgive, it is also true that one reaps what one sows. If anyone sows discord in their own family, they will inherit the wind.
. . . King David, for example, was forgiven the sin of adultery, but look at the terrible price he paid.
"Why does it seem that the faithful wife has been left alone while the ex husband seemingly has a new wife new child new home and doing quite well?" I suppose the answer to that one would have something to do with man's freewill, which is much touted on this Forum. |
| |
Adultery Sexual or Covenant Breaking |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
Recently I was approached by some people who presented an intriguing argument regarding adultery. These people stated that adultery, more fully understood Biblically is the willful and harmful violation(adulteration) of the primary, the permanence, and the honesty of the marriage. Thus, some extramarital relationships that involve no physical sexual expression whatever can be adultterous. On the other hand, extramarital sexuality with the active participation of both spouses that is marriage enhancing many not be adulteress at all.
They state, that the Jews understood, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" very differently than Church tradition. It onely applied to men if they had intercourse with someone else's wife. Bit iwas allowable for a married man to have intercourse with a single woman. Adultery was the sin of "of trespassing" on a man's property. Until marriage, women were the property of their fathers. after marriage they became the property of their husband.
In addition, these people state that Christ's laws of love and the golden rule support today's loving, respecting, non-monogamous relationships. The only real difference is that women now have the same rights of sexual enjoyment and variety that men had in the time of Christ Since Christ never condemned the unloving O.T. practices, he certainly wouldn't condemn today's loving, consenting, non-cheating relationships, Cheating adultery is cleary wrong since it involves lying and deception and clearly violates Christ's law of loving one another as ourselves. Therefore, their position is that in a marital-covanent relationship, if both husband and wife agree to these relationships, there is no adultery since the covanent is not broken.
These folks are the most committed and caring Christians I have ever known and at the same time they challenge everything that the church has taught and the context of the words pornea, translated as fornication. It does seem to be always tied with temple prostitution when I read the texts.
I would greatly appreciate other views as I study and test these thoughts against the orginal languages.
Thanks
|
| |
Adultery Sexual or Covenant Breaking |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
Recently I was approached by some people who presented an intriguing argument regarding adultery. These people stated that adultery, more fully understood Biblically is the willful and harmful violation(adulteration) of the primary, the permanence, and the honesty of the marriage. Thus, some extramarital relationships that involve no physical sexual expression whatever can be adultterous. On the other hand, extramarital sexuality with the active participation of both spouses that is marriage enhancing many not be adulteress at all.
They state, that the Jews understood, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" very differently than Church tradition. It onely applied to men if they had intercourse with someone else's wife. Bit iwas allowable for a married man to have intercourse with a single woman. Adultery was the sin of "of trespassing" on a man's property. Until marriage, women were the property of their fathers. after marriage they became the property of their husband.
In addition, these people state that Christ's laws of love and the golden rule support today's loving, respecting, non-monogamous relationships. The only real difference is that women now have the same rights of sexual enjoyment and variety that men had in the time of Christ Since Christ never condemned the unloving O.T. practices, he certainly wouldn't condemn today's loving, consenting, non-cheating relationships, Cheating adultery is cleary wrong since it involves lying and deception and clearly violates Christ's law of loving one another as ourselves. Therefore, their position is that in a marital-covanent relationship, if both husband and wife agree to these relationships, there is no adultery since the covanent is not broken.
These folks are the most committed and caring Christians I have ever known and at the same time they challenge everything that the church has taught and the context of the words pornea, translated as fornication. It does seem to be always tied with temple prostitution when I read the texts.
I would greatly appreciate other views as I study and test these thoughts against the orginal languages.
Thanks
|
| |
Adultery Sexual or Covenant Breaking |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
Your question is complex, involving a number of related but different issues. In all honesty I'm not sure it can be dealt with in a specific, detailed manner on the Forum. I won't attempt it. And I can offer no quick-fix answers. I've no idea who these "some people" in your question are, but I can't subscribe to their views. If you are earnestly seeking a Bible answer to the questions raised, and it's assumed you are, may I suggest you read, with the help of a good study Bible or commentary, all the references you can find to the issues you raise in your question. Read and study them several times -- as many times as necessary to soak up what that really are saying. I believe you will come away with God's answers to your questions. I wish you well. Good reading! |
| |
Who's sinning? |
|
|
|
Col 3:9
|
| |
Lionstrong,
Please permit me to ramble on just a little bit more to (finally) answer your question. According to my previous explanation, the root of sinning (committing unrighteous acts) is unbelief in what God says. That is why it is SO important to have our mind renewed as Christians by God's Word. God's not crazy about our acts of sin (Jesus died for each one we commit or omit) but He really wants to get at the root of why we commit sins - our belief system. That is what He wants to change. If, through His Spirit and His wonderful Word, He changes our mind (renews) it to see things from His point of view (truth) THEN, and only then, will our actions change. Our actions will follow what we truly believe. If I don't believe that God can provide all my needs, I'll resort to stealing. If I don't believe God has provided me with one wife to enjoy life with, I'll resort to adultery. If I don't belief God has revealed His true self to me through Jesus Christ, I'll worship other gods. Sins are always related to wrong belief or doubting God.
That being said, Paul describes the his old man, old nature in chapter 7 of Romans and the new man in chapter 8. Without going terribly indepth (I type slow), here's the situation. Paul used to be a Pharisee. He describes elsewhere his 'fleshly' credentials in keeping the law. At least outwardly. Inwardly, he says that he was the chief of sinners. Starting in Romans 7:14, Paul says that he knew the law was good and spiritual. He wanted to keep it. But he couldn't keep it. He tried, through his works, but the harder he tried, the more he failed. He knew, from studying the law, what God said and what God expected. And he sincerely wanted to obey God. But he had the old Adamic nature, the sin nature that caused his flesh to rebel and not keep God's law. His inner man vs.22 agreed with God's law but he found his body subjected to the law of sin, and wouldn't obey. The old nature held his body slave to sin. It was driving him nuts! He longed for deliverence. Then, he says in vs. 24, 'who will deliver me from this conflict?' And he answers it, thanks be to God THROUGH Jesus Christ we are delivered.
God crucified our old nature, the sin nature, us without God, the old man with Christ on the cross. That master of our bodies is dead and gone. But, in the Christian, we still have 'flesh' - not a sin nature that says we MUST sin, but a fallen body with habits and a resource for us to get our needs met from within. But our flesh no longer has the old sin nature standing over it saying, 'Sin, sin, sin.' That was crucified with Christ. So, without a master, the flesh says, "What now? How do I act? Who is the master?"
And here, brother, is where you have a choice as a Christian. You can either:
A. 'Present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.' Allow Christ to 'work out' through your body what He has 'worked in' to your spirit. This is walking in the Spirit, relying upon Christ to be your suffieciency for every situation.
Or:
B. Not submit your body to Christ, in which case it will rely and 'fall back' on the only thing it knows, what the sin nature trained it to do. That means relying upon yourself and your own resources to get your needs met. Your body, flesh will resort back to sinning. It knows nothing else.
That is why Paul says to set your mind on things above. Only then will your body follow. That is why Paul says in Romans 6:16 - '16 Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. 18 You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.'
So, Paul says to count yourselves (accept it as true) to sin but alive to God. So, when a Christian sins (commits a wrong act), it is because we are not believing what God says and relying on our old flesh, self-suffieciency to get what we want (remember Abraham with Isaac and Ismael?). We can do that as Christians. But we can also choose to submit ourselves to God and allow Him to be our all-in-all.
Whew, I'm getting tired. (Stinking flesh, my spirit is willing, though) I hope this helps. Let me know. I'm still 'learning to believe.'
God bless. |
| |
why is masterbation a sin. |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you.... If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you...." Matthew 5:28-30
This is simply a short(?) excerpt from a longer response to an earlier question from "searchingfortruth" on 4/3 (which may be the same question that "prayon" referred to earlier). I'd suggest looking over several of the many responses to that question, which were insightful and helpful.
The issue is not primarily one of action alone but one of willful inclination, attitude and thought. Just as pusuing adulterous thoughts equals adultery, pursuing thoughts about intercourse outside of marriage equals fornication. Likewise, willfully placing oneself in a position of temptation and-or stimulation of sexual hunger is sin. It is difficult for me to conceive of deliberate contact (e.g. masturbation) resulting in orgasm as unaccompanied by some form of fantasizing or pursuit of temptation.
I can not claim to be without sin in this regard. However, that doesn't change the gravity of the act. We are to "flee immorality" even above other sins (1 Cor 6:18) and to "flee from youthful lusts" (2 Tim 2:22).
(As a side note, I would consider this to be very different from "wet dreams" -- which are often a natural release not directly related to any deliberate pursuit of temptation on the part of the individual prior to going to sleep. They may be irritating and unpleasantly messy, and the lack of control of one's thought may feel disturbing and "dirty", but I believe this is often a false guilt.) |
| |
Is suicide a sin? |
|
|
|
Ex 20:13
|
| |
1 john is talking to believers and it is not talking about heaven. It is talking about fellowship with God not heaven at all. The theme of the book is: What should a believer do to walk in fellowship with the Lord.
1 John 2:17
"The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever." Who is God's will for?
##There is nothing about heaven in this verses.
What is the "Will of God"?
What do the following verses have to do with a Christian committing suicide? NOTHING!
4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment;
5 and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6 and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter;
7 and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men
8 (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day by their lawless deeds),
9 then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment,
10 and especially those who indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority. Daring, self-willed, they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties,
11 whereas angels who are greater in might and power do not bring a reviling judgment against them before the Lord.
12 But these, like unreasoning animals, born as creatures of instinct to be captured and killed, reviling where they have no knowledge, will in the destruction of those creatures also be destroyed,
13 suffering wrong as the wages of doing wrong. They count it a pleasure to revel in the daytime. They are stains and blemishes, reveling in their deceptions, as they carouse with you,
14 having eyes full of adultery that never cease from sin, enticing unstable souls, having a heart trained in greed, accursed children;
15 forsaking the right way, they have gone astray, having followed the way of Balaam, the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
16 but he received a rebuke for his own transgression, for a mute donkey, speaking with a voice of a man, restrained the madness of the prophet.
17 These are springs without water and mists driven by a storm, for whom the black darkness has been reserved.
18 For speaking out arrogant words of vanity they entice by fleshly desires, by sensuality, those who barely escape from the ones who live in error,
19 promising them freedom while they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by what a man is overcome, by this he is enslaved.
20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first.
21 For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them.
22 It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire."
Just to make sure you understand what I said. Yes, a Christian can "live" in sin and still go to heaven. Without a doubt. Why do you think it is called "Eternal Life"? Why is it called a gift? Not something you work for. It's free.
One must learn to keep verses in there context. I'm not sure what your trying to do.
There is not one verse in all the Bible that says if a Christian lives in their sin they won't go to heaven. Show me one, just one.
Hermenutics to ya.
Have a great day.
FisH
|
| |
Should a divorced Christian remarry? |
|
|
|
Matt 5:32
|
| |
There are Scriptural grounds for divorce: adultery or desertion. The key to answering your question lies in the proper understanding of the word divorce and what it means, including what it meant to the average Greek, Roman or Jew of the first century when he heard the word.
A tradition dating back centuries and beginning with the Roman Catholic Church views divorce as "legal separation from bed and board." And that's all divorce is in this tradition.
However, The people of the time of Jesus' earthly ministry, both Jews and Greeks, properly understood that divorce was the "dissolution of the marriage bond just as though it had never existed."
If one accepts the second definition (the definition that is true both Biblically and historically), then one can only come to one conclusion: The RIGHT TO DIVORCE carries with it THE RIGHT TO REMARRY. If it doesn't, then divorce is not dissolution of the marriage bond just as though it had never existed. Instead divorce becomes legal separation from bed and board, nothing else.
Which definition to follow: the popular one (legal separation) or the historically and Biblically sound one (dissolution of the marital bond, which carries with it the right to remarry)?
Additionally, 1 Cor 7:11 clearly teaches that "If a Christian divorces another Christian except for adultery, neither partner is free to marry another person. They should reconcile, or at least remain unmarried" (p. 1738, MacArthur Study Bible, Word, 1997).
Since you yourself had Scriptural grounds for divorce (sexual immorality on the part of your spouse), then you would have the right to divorce, which carries with it the right to remarry.
I have given you what the Bible says on the matter. In addition, I suggest you talk to a pastor who bases all his doctrine and practice on Scripture only. God lead you into all truth and give you peace of mind over this issue. |
| |
Is it breaking God's covenant? |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
I believe that under ANY circumstances, having sexual (or even non-sexual) relations with anyone outside of marriage can be considered adulterous and in direct defiance of the laws of God concerning marriage. Jesus said (quoting Genesis) in Matt 19:4-6, "...Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
No matter what the situation, whether both parties consent or not, bringing a third (or fourth, or fifth, or sixth...) party into the marriage bed DEFILES it (Heb 11:4). This is still adultery and God will judge it.
|
| |
What was David's hidden agenda? |
|
|
|
2 Samuel
|
| |
In 2 Samuel 11:3-17, David brings Uriah back under the pretense of seeking information about the course of the war (v. 6), and tells him to go home and relax (v. 8). What he does not say specifically is what is most important, and well understood by Uriah (v. 11). David wanted Uriah and Bathsheba to enjoy their evening together (v. 8) to cover David's sin of adultery - this would be the "evidence" that would get David off the hook since Bathsheba was pregnant by David. In v. 13, David made him drunk hoping that in this condition he would relent and go to Bathsheba but Uriah again did not go down to his house. Unsuccessful in making it appear that Uriah was the father of Bathsheba's child, David plotted Uriah's death so he could marry Bathsheba himself as quickly as possible. (v. 15) NASB Study Bible Zondervan. |
| |
What are false prophets? |
|
|
|
Matt 7:15
|
| |
"False prophets prophesied lies, deceived the people with their dreams..."
Hank: I submit the following information in answer to your question:
False Prophet
"Even though the Old Testament does not use the term "false prophet, " it is clear that such "professional prophets" existed throughout much of Israel's history and that they were diametrically opposed to the canonical prophets. Scripture, however, regarded them as mere imitations of the genuinely appointed prophets of God.
"Distinguishing Marks of False Prophecy and False Prophets. It was the Septuagint translators who introduced the term pseudoprophetes ("false prophet") ten times where the Hebrew text simply used the generic term nabi ("prophet") But the Hebrew text nevertheless still made the same point with the whole battery of negative descriptions.
"False prophets prophesied lies, deceived the people with their dreams, prophesied by the alleged authority of Baal, threatened the lives of the true prophets, and dared to speak when they had not stood in the council of Yahweh and received a word directly from the Lord. Typically, their prophecies promised peace when there was no peace to be had, for their visions were drawn out of their own hearts .
"Some false prophets used magic, others appeared to use divination, soothsaying, witchcraft, necromancy, and sorcery, which were all forbidden arts and practices in the classical passage that set forth divine revelation in contrast to such practices (Deut 18:9-13). The false prophets gave the people what they wanted to hear and thereby placed "whitewash" over every situation, no matter how adverse it appeared.
"The fullest discussion of charges that could be brought against false prophets can be found in Jeremiah 23:9-39. Jeremiah condemns the pseudoprophets on four grounds: (1) they are men of immoral character (v. 14—"they commit adultery and live a lie"); (2) they seek popular acclaim with their unconditional pledge of immunity from all imminent disasters (vv. 17-22); (3) they fail to distinguish their own dreams from a word from God (vv. 25-29); and (4) they are plagiarists who steal from one another words allegedly from the Lord (vv. 30-39). Rather than having a "burden" from the Lord, they themselves were another burden—both to the Lord and to the misled people!"
To see all the Scripture references and/or to read the entire article, "False Prophet," click on the following link. (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi) Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, edited by Walter A. Elwell, 1996, published by Baker Books, a division of Baker Book House Company, PO Box 6287, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49516-6287. |
| |
Ten Commandments obsolete? |
|
|
|
Rom 10:4
|
| |
Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that Christ fulfilled the entire Law by his atoning work. But the Law has never been the way of salvation. It has always pointed to Christ. But no in the sense that it still does apply to us, _through Christ_ as a manifestation of God's character.
So even though we no longer stone for adultery (might not be a bad idea though), we can still learn at least the following things from Mosaic discourse on the subject: 1) God deems it as worthy of temporal execution, so the state would do well to affix penalties to marital unfaithfulness; 2) since execution has been replaced with excommunication, the church should not be squeemish about excommunicating for it; 3) extra-marital sex is more serious than pre-marital sex (not the death penalty for the former, but less than that for the latter); 4) there are clearly defined limits to acceptable sexual behavior.
It must be remembered that these commands have nothing whatsoever to do with justification, but everything to do with sanctification. We are called to obedience, and we know how to obey by examining the Law through the lens of Christ. |
| |
What is meant by this passage? |
|
|
|
James 4:5
|
| |
Greetings Bleavell!
This is a very difficult verse to translate, let alone interpret. Here is the literal reading of the Greek text:
"Or do you think that in vain the Scripture says, to/for jealousy he longs for the spirit which he placed in us."
The first phrase is fairly clear (Or, do you think that Scripture says in vain...".) However, in the second phrase there are several difficult tranlation decisions which must be made.
1) Is spirit the subject or the object of the clause? In form, spirit could be either. However, I think it is more likely that spirit is the object. For one thing, if spirit is the subject, there is no other object for the verb 'he longs for.' Secondly, the pronoun 'which' would have no antecedent.
2) How should 'for jealousy' be translated? The best option seems to be to treat it as an adverb, even though it is a noun.
Based upon these choices, the smoother English translation would read something like this:
"Or, Do you think that Scripture says in vain, 'He jealously longs for the spirit which He placed in us.'"
Now that we have translated the verse, we still have to interpret it. This is just a difficult task as the tranlation, since it is not clear to what Scripture verse James is referring.
1) Is 'spirit' a reference to the Holy Spirit, or to man's spirit? I believe it is a reference to man's spirit (i.e. - life), since the context deals with man's attitudes towards one another and God. In fact, there is no clear reference in the entire book of James to the Holy Spirit.
Consider the logic of the passage, which probably begins at 3:13. Chapter four begins with a discussion of evil desires. James asks in 4:1, "What causes fights and quarrels among you?...." He then answers that they come from our internal desires. We want something, but don't get it. We will kill or fight to get what we want - v. 2. However, we don't ask God. Even when we do ask God, we don't get what we want because we ask with wrong motives- v. 3. We ask for our own pleasure.
James 4:4 is the key (I think) to understanding verse 5. This attitude that he has been describing is now equated with spiritual adultery. Rather than loving and longing for God, we are seeking the pleasures of this world. We have become His enemies.
In this context, James 4:5 would be saying that God is a jealous God - cf. Exodus 20:5. He wants our worship and love.
I hope this helps!
Tim Moran |
| |
Can a divorced person remarry? |
|
|
|
1 Cor 7:15
|
| |
God's utter hatred of divorce is very clear in Scripture.
Louder:
Nonetheless, there are two extraordinary cases in which Scripture teaches that God does permit divorced people to remarry.
First, note that Jesus Himself included this exception clause: "Whosoever shall put away his wife, *except it be for fornication*, and shall marry another, committeth adultery" (Matt. 19:9, King James Version, emphasis added). He allows an exception in this one case, only "because of the hardness of your hearts" (Matt. 19:8). Clearly, Jesus is treating divorce as a last resort, only to be sought in the case of hard-hearted adultery.
The apostle Paul allows one more reason for divorce: if an unbelieving spouse abandons a believer, the believer is under no obligation in such a case (1 Cor. 7:14). This would free the abandoned spouse to remarry.
But we must emphasize that apart from those two specific, exceptional cases, divorce is not sanctioned in Scripture.(http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/divorce.htm)
More extensive answers to this question are available in John MacArthur, The Fulfilled Family (Chicago: Moody, 1981); and, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Matthew 16-23,(Chicago: Moody, 1988).
|
| |
What does 1 Tim 3:2 mean? |
|
|
|
1 Tim 3:2
|
| |
Steve,
In your answer I'm sure you meant to include the case of an unbelieving husband who divorces his believing wife. Let me refer you to another reason for divorce given by Jesus in Matt 5:32 [but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.] NASU. Jesus also states in Matt 19:9 ["And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."] NASU. Would you agree that a second reason is given by Jesus wherby divorce is permitted? In these verses Jesus allows the spouse who has been betrayed by adultry to be released from the marriage but He does not say they must leave. Sounds a lot like the relationship between God and Israel doesn't it? I am sorry that we have strayed from the original question but it is all connected as we discuss the subject.
May the Lord Bless You, Phillip
|
| |
What does 1 Tim 3:2 mean? |
|
|
|
1 Tim 3:2
|
| |
God's utter hatred of divorce is very clear in Scripture. But is it true that "There is only one reason for the divorce, for a Christian"?
Steve:
"God's utter hatred of divorce is very clear in Scripture.
"Nonetheless, there are two extraordinary cases in which Scripture teaches that God does permit divorced people to remarry.
"First, note that Jesus Himself included this exception clause: "Whosoever shall put away his wife, *except it be for fornication*, and shall marry another, committeth adultery" (Matt. 19:9, King James Version, emphasis added). He allows an exception in this one case, only "because of the hardness of your hearts" (Matt. 19:8). Clearly, Jesus is treating divorce as a last resort, only to be sought in the case of hard-hearted adultery.
"The apostle Paul allows one more reason for divorce: if an unbelieving spouse abandons a believer, the believer is under no obligation in such a case (1 Cor. 7:14). This would free the abandoned spouse to remarry.
"But we must emphasize that apart from those two specific, exceptional cases, divorce is not sanctioned in Scripture.(http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/divorce.htm)
More extensive answers to this question are available in John MacArthur, The Fulfilled Family (Chicago: Moody, 1981); and, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Matthew 16-23,(Chicago: Moody, 1988).
1 Thess 4:8 So, he who rejects this is not rejecting man but the God who gives His Holy Spirit to you.
|
| |
The hard heart is not the adulterer. |
|
|
|
1 Tim 3:2
|
| |
The writer has the hard heart in the wrong person.
It is the hardness of the heart of the innocent spouse. Hosea did not divorce Gomer, tho she committed hard-hearted adultery. God has not divorced Israle, not Christ the church - tho we both commit hard-hearted adultery. |
| |
How do we pull marriage out? |
|
|
|
1 Tim 3:2
|
| |
Ed, the consensus among wiser men by far than I -- learned, God-fearing men who have devoted their lives to Bible exegesis -- is that this passage in Paul's Timothy letter and in the virtually parallel passage in his Titus letter are to be understood thusly: A man who desires to be an overseer (bishop, elder) should (if he is married) be the husband of one wife (not a polygamist or woman-chaser) and his children (if he has any) should be obedient believers. A man whom his wife divorces because of his marital infidelity would clearly be disqualifed to hold a church office, but a man whose wife commits adultery and a divorce results would just as clearly not be disqualified. And inasmuch as the death of a spouse ends the marriage contract, a widower would not be disqualifed unless he failed to meet the other criteria specified in the passages in question. I don't know any better way to say it. --Hank |
| |
Can a divorced person remarry? |
|
|
|
1 Cor 7:15
|
| |
JVH0212: Thanks for the elaborateness. However scripture still holds no water for condoning divorce as far as it is clearly understood by myself. One point is that Jesus first states a condition for divorce, and that is in the case of fornication. However Jesus does not state at any point that remarriage after divorce is acceptable. I say this because the first part of the statement is cut short to indicate this exception, and continues the statement that once that person is divorced remarriage is adultery. This makes more sense in the whole context of scripture regarding marriage. The other related scriptures support this to a greater degree. Matt 5:32 "but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery." I am yet to be convicted of believing otherwise. I have prayed about it and I trust the Lord that this be of simple anointed understanding, and not of confusion in condoning that which seems of the flesh and unprofitable. God bless, Louder...
|
| |
| To See More, Click Here... |
|
|
