Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | David multiple wives, a life time of sin | Acts 13:22 | DocTrinsograce | 165893 | ||
Dear Finder, Polygamy and adultery are very different things... very different things indeed! There is no admonition in Scripture regarding taking more than one wife. The practice of monogamy stems from the principles of Scripture, not from the Law. Notice, for example, that God created only a single wife for Adam. Furthermore, every instance of polygamy in Scripture was accompanied by a plethora of additional problems, both practical and spiritual. Whereas David committed adultery with Bathsheba, his other matrimonial relationships were not adulterous. Indeed, in 2 Samuel 20:3 we find David carefully avoiding adultery and showing kindness to ten concubines. Since Absalom had slept with them (2 Samuel 16:22), if David had had relations with them it would have been adulterous. The norm during that day would have been to have killed the concubines. Instead, David very generously sees to their care for the rest of their lives. Every one of us is fraught with failure and shortcomings. That is what the Scriptural doctrine of total depravity is all about. It is a matter of extensiveness, not intensiveness. David was a man like us all, but without the advantage of the full canon of Scripture. Nevertheless, the general bent of his life manifested his love for the Lord, the source of grace by which he lived. In the spirit of Christian charity, I urge you to not place fault against anyone above that which is done by the Word of God. To do so is to fail at obedience to the law (James 4:11). A high regard for the Scripture means that we take care not to say anything more or anything less than that which has been given us by God. In Him, Doc |
||||||
2 | What is implication of Absalom in case | Acts 13:22 | Finder | 165946 | ||
Dear Doc, Thank you for your post. My intention was not trying to violate James 4:11 but my main intention was to being able to difine what the boundaries of sin are and what having a heart after God is. It still looks to me that if a woman, for example, would have two husbands, each time she had relations with one, she would be committing adutery against the other. And that is what it seems to have happened to David. Or would adultery be defined by the violation of what we write on paper rather than the physical relations themselves?(as might be implied by the problem Absalom caused to David). Finder |
||||||
3 | What is implication of Absalom in case | Acts 13:22 | DocTrinsograce | 165947 | ||
Dear Finder, Which is the incident in David's life that you had in mind? In Him, Doc |
||||||
4 | David's wives became impure after Absalo | Acts 13:22 | Finder | 165948 | ||
Dear Doc, The incident was having the possession of multiple wives. David, in opposition to Deut. 17:17, multiplied wives to himself besides Abigail, Ahinoam, and Michal: Maachah daughter of Talmai king of Geshur, whom probably he took in his raid (1 Sam. 27:8), Haggith, Abital, Eglah And the question is that if physical relations with more than one person is adultery, or adultery is only what violates what is on paper. But I believe Jesus mentioned that even looking at another woman with a lustful thought was already adultery. So the "official" marriage on paper doesn't seem to be the primary problem but the act itself. The incident involving Absalom is that according to your interpretation, only then, David's wives were violated. But that he didn't violate each one with previous multiple relations. In Him, Finder |
||||||
5 | David's wives became impure after Absalo | Acts 13:22 | DocTrinsograce | 165950 | ||
Dear Finder, Adultery is the cohabitation of a married person with someone other than their spouse. Polygamy in David's time was not adulterous nor promiscuous. The Scriptures are a progressive revelation. Christ brought greater specificity and clarity to us on this subject and many others. David should be judged by the values as understood during his day, not our own. With the exception of the premarital relations David had with Bathsheba, who was, indeed, another man's wife, his wives and concubines were solely his own. Although we might question the wisdom of David's polygamy, we cannot fault him as violating the Mosaic Law. In Him, Doc |
||||||
6 | What is sanctification in a marriage | Acts 13:22 | Finder | 165953 | ||
Dear Doc, Thanks for your posting. But it is giving me a hard time to absorb the idea that the reality of holiness that could be simply stated by the command to have only one wife should be "complex" enough to have to wait a progressive revelation and greater specificity to clarify what is lawful or sinful or holy. I thought sanctification would already have been implied by Genesis 2:24 and Deut 17:17. In Him, Finder |
||||||
7 | What is sanctification in a marriage | Acts 13:22 | DocTrinsograce | 165956 | ||
Dear Finder, You're right, the implications of those verses seem pretty clear... with the advantage of hindsight. However, note that they are not explicit. In the case of Genesis it was instruction to Adam. In the case of Deuteronomy the word "many" is subjective. Since David is never faulted for the multiplicity of wives he accrued, we may rightly infer that God was not overtly dissatisfied with his behavior in this area -- He only sent Nathan to David concerning the sin of adultery with Bathsheba. (After all, God in His mercy and love justifies us while we are yet sinners. The righteousness of His elect is the righteousness of Christ.) Remember, also, as Paul states it, sin is not counted where there is no law (Romans 5:13). Everything that David accomplished was by the grace of God (Psalm 4:1). God is the supreme judge. Therefore, if God chooses to declare David a righteous man (1 King 3:6), after God's own heart (Acts 13:22), it is His prerogative to do so. We must be careful not to second guess the Sovereign Lord God who judges the quick and the dead. Thank you, but you're giving me too much credit when you called it "your view." I've spent far too little time in the study of the Mosaic Law to venture a personal opinion. Furthermore, I'm pretty careful about presuming that I could bring something original to the table! I'm simply relaying the understanding that has long been expressed in orthodox OT scholarship. In Him, Doc |
||||||