Results 1 - 20 of 36
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: JuanMas Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How are marriages created in the Bible | Ps 1:1 | JuanMas | 160091 | ||
Tim, Thank you for your response. You are right about civil law traditions. But just speaking from a theoretical point of view, Jacob and Rachel [Genesis 29:20] probably did have a wedding celebration since she was his betrothed. However, the same could not have been true with Leah who became his wife first. The implication of this is that couples who consider themselves "just living together" may actually be creating a "marriage".:-) |
||||||
2 | How are marriages created in the Bible | Ps 1:1 | JuanMas | 160079 | ||
What constitutes a marriage? I, like many of you learned that one got married by reciting “vows” before a priest, minister or other official in a marriage ceremony. However, as far as I know, The Bible does not call for or endorse such a ritual. Simply put, The Bible shows that a man and a woman must do only two things in order to be considered “married”: Cohabitate and Consummate. I offer the following as proof: [Deuteronomy 21:10-13] tells the story of a soldier who falls in love with a woman POW (prisoner of war) and provides strict instructions for making her his wife. Chief among them is to bring her to his home (cohabitation) to live and after a month “go in unto her” (consummation). [Genesis 29:20] refers to the marriage of Jacob to Rachel and her sister Leah. Again, the crucial ingredients were cohabitation (both women were brought to Jacob’s house to live) and consummation (Jacob had relations with both women). For those who want to argue that a wedding ceremony took place first during the feast, consider this – If Jacob was “tricked” into marrying Leah (he didn’t realize it until the next morning), there could not have been a wedding ceremony involving Jacob and Leah. That’s because her father delivered Leah first to be “deflowered” by Jacob and Jacob according to The Bible, did not realize this until the next morning. [Genesis 16:2] of course is the story of Abram and Sarai in which Sarai gave her maid, Hagar to her husband to be his wife. Again the pattern holds true – Cohabitation and Consummation. [Genesis 1:27] and finally, the original marriage that started it all – Adam and Eve. Are there any examples of vow exchanging ceremonys in the Bible that I might have missed? |
||||||
3 | Marriage/divorce (believer/unbeliever) | 1 Cor 7:13 | JuanMas | 160078 | ||
If you cannot continue in a relationship with your husband 1 Cor 7:10-11 is the rule to follow. | ||||||
4 | Did Michael Shiavo Commit Adultery? | Bible general Archive 3 | JuanMas | 159845 | ||
The family is the foundation of our society and The Bible contains the "Rules" that govern their creation and maintenance. According to some recent surveys I've read, individuals who describe themselves as "Born Again Christians" have a higher divorce rate than athiests and agnostics. So where are we going wrong with our teachings? Why are so many Christian families breaking up? Maybe it's time for our churches to put more emphasis on "The Rules of Marriage" found in the Bible and maybe that will reduce the amount of societal self-destruction that is so prevalent today. |
||||||
5 | Did Michael Shiavo Commit Adultery? | Bible general Archive 3 | JuanMas | 159844 | ||
Most people want to know how to apply the Bible to everyday life. I am not seeking a "legal" interpretation, but a "Biblical" one. You are right, it is a high profile case, but a number of Christians have publicly commented on the case. One group openly stated that they thought Michael should have divorced Terry, turn her over to her parents and move on with his life. My study of Mat 19:9 indicates that advice goes against the teachings of the Bible. So you can see there are lots of opinions out there. What can we learn from this case? What Biblical principles/Scripture should we apply if we find ourselves in a similar predicament? That's why this forum is the perfect venue for this type of discussion. |
||||||
6 | Did Michael Shiavo Commit Adultery? | Not Specified | JuanMas | 159808 | ||
A friend of mine and I were discussing the Terry Shiavo case and debating whether or not Michael Shiavo committed adultery with the woman he was living with and had children with before his wife Terry died. Assuming this woman was "Biblically Single", what verse(s) in the Bible define Michael Shiavo's relationship with this woman as adultery. we have noticed how people make assumptions about what is and what is not in the Bible without knowing the facts. Fact: The Old Testament(Deu 22:23-24) defines adultery in terms of the marital status of the woman - not the man. If any man (married or single) has sex with a woman who is the wife or fiance of another man, it is called adultery. Fact: Mat 19:9 calls it adultery when a man divorces his wife for reasons other than fornication and marries another. It also states that adultery has occurred when any man marries a woman who is divorced. So with this background in mind, what verse(s) in the Bible would define Michael Shiavo's relationship with the "other woman" as adultery? Again remember the assumption is that she was "Biblically Single"(never married or engaged to another man). |
||||||
7 | Did Michael Shiavo Commit Adultery? | Bible general Archive 3 | JuanMas | 159818 | ||
A friend of mine and I were discussing the Terry Shiavo case and debating whether or not Michael Shiavo committed adultery with the woman he was living with and had children with before his wife Terry died. Assuming this woman was "Biblically Single", what verse(s) in the Bible define Michael Shiavo's relationship with this woman as adultery. we have noticed how people make assumptions about what is and what is not in the Bible without knowing the facts. Fact: The Old Testament(Deu 22:23-24) defines adultery in terms of the marital status of the woman - not the man. If any man (married or single) has sex with a woman who is the wife or fiance of another man, it is called adultery. Fact: Mat 19:9 calls it adultery when a man divorces his wife for reasons other than fornication and marries another. It also states that adultery has occurred when any man marries a woman who is divorced. So with this background in mind, what verse(s) in the Bible would define Michael Shiavo's relationship with the "other woman" as adultery? Again remember the assumption is that she was "Biblically Single"(never married or engaged to another man). |
||||||
8 | Did Michael Shiavo Commit Adultery? | Bible general Archive 3 | JuanMas | 159820 | ||
A friend of mine and I were discussing the Terry Shiavo case and debating whether or not Michael Shiavo committed adultery with the woman he was living with and had children with before his wife Terry died. Assuming this woman was "Biblically Single", what verse(s) in the Bible define Michael Shiavo's relationship with this woman as adultery. we have noticed how people make assumptions about what is and what is not in the Bible without knowing the facts. Fact: The Old Testament(Deu 22:23-24) defines adultery in terms of the marital status of the woman - not the man. If any man (married or single) has sex with a woman who is the wife or fiance of another man, it is called adultery. Fact: Mat 19:9 calls it adultery when a man divorces his wife for reasons other than fornication and marries another. It also states that adultery has occurred when any man marries a woman who is divorced. So with this background in mind, what verse(s) in the Bible would define Michael Shiavo's relationship with the "other woman" as adultery? Again remember the assumption is that she was "Biblically Single"(never married or engaged to another man). |
||||||
9 | Are God's laws applicable to everyone? | Not Specified | JuanMas | 154675 | ||
Are God's laws applicable to everyone or only to believers? Our discsssion group has been debating this issue for some time. I say they apply to all regardless while my pastor friend disagrees. I believe there is a difference between "applicablility" and "accountability". For example, two men commit the same sin (marry a divorced woman with a living ex - Mathew 19:9 and 5:32). One man does so "out of ignorance" while the other does so with "full knowledge" that they were doing wrong. The man who committed the sin "out of ignorance" according to the Bible would not be held accountable since he "did not know". On the other hand, the individual who committed the sin "knowing it was wrong" would be held accountable by God. Although both received different treatments, they both committed the same offense and broke the same law. In 1 Cor 7:12-15, Paul is addressing "mixed marriages" - that is a marriage between a "believer" and an "unbeliever". So what does Paul mean when he says that the remaining spouse is "no longer under bondage". It is my contention that Jesus' command that divorce only occur for the "cause of fornication" applies to both "believers" and "unbelievers" alike. And that the "divorced" wife, weather a "believer" or "unbeliever" is still required to adhere to 1 Cor 7:10-11 - "... remain single or reconcile ....". Therefore "no longer under bondage" cannot imply a violation of 1 Cor 7:10-11. |
||||||
10 | Are God's laws applicable to everyone? | Bible general Archive 2 | JuanMas | 154680 | ||
Are God's laws applicable to everyone or only to believers? Our discsssion group has been debating this issue for some time. I say they apply to all regardless while my pastor friend disagrees. I believe there is a difference between "applicablility" and "accountability". For example, two men commit the same sin (marry a divorced woman with a living ex - Mathew 19:9 and 5:32). One man does so "out of ignorance" while the other does so with "full knowledge" that they were doing wrong. The man who committed the sin "out of ignorance" according to the Bible would not be held accountable since he "did not know". On the other hand, the individual who committed the sin "knowing it was wrong" would be held accountable by God. Although both received different treatments, they both committed the same offense and broke the same law. In 1 Cor 7:12-15, Paul is addressing "mixed marriages" - that is a marriage between a "believer" and an "unbeliever". So what does Paul mean when he says that the remaining spouse is "no longer under bondage". It is my contention that Jesus' command that divorce only occur for the "cause of fornication" applies to both "believers" and "unbelievers" alike. And that the "divorced" wife, weather a "believer" or "unbeliever" is still required to adhere to 1 Cor 7:10-11 - "... remain single or reconcile ....". Therefore "no longer under bondage" cannot imply a violation of 1 Cor 7:10-11. |
||||||
11 | Which Mat 18 verse are you referring to | Matt 19:9 | JuanMas | 115351 | ||
I read Mat 18 here on the Forum and found Mat 18:6-7 reinforced the points I have made concerning misleading the faithful: "Matt 18:6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Matt 18:7 "Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!" Which verse or verses were you referring to specifically when you said "I suggest that if we as mature believers see a brother in a cycle of sin we would do well to follow Matthew chapter 18. I am not one to judge others sin, as much as I hope I am an encourager to those abiding in Christ". |
||||||
12 | I'm confused about salvation | Matt 19:9 | JuanMas | 115350 | ||
What is more important than the family? It's not the Christians following the blueprint I'm concerned about - it's those who are not. Let's be real. Look at the divorce statistics among Christians and don't be afraid to remove the "blinders". We have rampant divorce. We have Christian couples (many with children) going through cycles of marriage and divorce. We have blended families, created from these unions that become breeding grounds for hatred, immorality and other evils. Both younger and older children begin acting out because they resent what has happened to their family. This translates into more crime, more immorality and more familial instability - all passed from one generation to the next. So tell me why this topic is not important enough to be a priority. The Biblical "blueprint" is more than about sex - It's a recipe for the creation and maintenance of a stable, moral society. The family IS the basic unit of all humanity. I once had a Christian lady, a pastor's wife, tell me that in her opinion, a good man is someone who pays his child support. I was offended by this statement because a father is more than a child support check. Many men today are not fulling their responsibilities as husbands and fathers because they don't follow God's blueprint. A father plays a crucial role in the molding, development and maturation of his children. And a part-time dad who only contributes money is certainly not an effective contributor according to the "blueprint". As someone once told me, you're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem. So if you as a minister, bless a marriage that is in reality an "adulterous" union, Are you part of the solution or part of the problem? I'm not asking anyone to treat other people as 2nd class Christians or anything else derogatory. Just speak the truth and let the parties decide what should be done. That's why some ministers counsel an engaged couple prior to performing the marriage ceremony. If they discover the couple is in the midst of or about to create an adulterous relationship, they politely refuse to conduct the ceremony and truthfully and tactfully explain why to the couple (Mat 19:9, etc). The appropriateness of this forum is education. I too am a victim of pastoral misinformation. And I remained in the dark until becoming enlightened with the truth through personal research. That's why I encourage everyone to read, study, discuss and learn as they conduct their own. Praising the Lord is more than shouting "Hallelujah" and "Praise The Lord" at the top of our lungs. It's also following his Word. Talk is cheap. Actions speak volumns. |
||||||
13 | I'm confused about salvation | Matt 19:9 | JuanMas | 115160 | ||
Thank you for your response. I differentiate between what disciples like John, et. al have written on their own and those who quote Jesus directly. And so the central question has to be, Why did Jesus say what he did (in Mat 19:9, Mat 5:32, Luke 16:18 and 1 Cor 7:10-11) if it was not meant to be followed?. Are our religious leaders supposed to turn a "blind eye" and condone violations of Jesus' message? or are they suppose to show us the "right" way? The point of confusion I believe is, what is meant by "receiving" salvation? The Bible says you are a "new creature". That "all your sins are washed away". However what this actually means and what it implies is where the confusion lies. For example, if a wife who has committed adultery confesses her sin and receives salvation, what should she do from that point on? Jesus said clearly, "Go and sin no more". But what does "Go and sin no more" mean? In the context of this example, her sin was removed, but her marriage was still intact. Therefore to "go and sin no more" would imply that she should follow 1 Cor 7:10-11: "remain single or reconcile". This would remain in effect until and if she becomes a widow. Even in the context of an "illegal" divorce, the above would still be true and would preclude a relationship with another man. As I have pointed out previously, Christians advocating/using apparent loopholes in the Scriptures to justify committing sin are stuck in a "cycle of sin". It is not for me or anyone else to pass judgement - that's God's province. It's up to each individual to become educated and conduct himself/herself accordingly and take responsibility for their own decisions. It's difficult enough to do the right thing, but especially when so much misinformation is being diseminated by our religious leaders. I know quite a few ministers who are misleading their "flock" on this matter. These same ministers also want their "flock" to check their intellect at the door and never raise questions about their pronouncements. Whether it's out of malice or out of ignorance does not matter - the result is the same: destruction of the family. Everyone needs to become educated about God's "blueprint" for the family. After all, the family is the foundation of humanity and it has been weakened considerably since the time of Christ. Adherence to God's blueprint is the solution and it's time for everyone to get with the program. I'm not asking people to be condescending "busybodies". I'm asking people to be loving, kind, generous and patient as they convey their teachings. Those who stumble "out of ignorance" will not be held accountable. But those who deliberately mislead and cause others to fall; and those who continue in the "cycle of sin" will ultimately be held accountable for their actions. |
||||||
14 | I'm confused about salvation | Matt 19:9 | JuanMas | 114800 | ||
The purpose of declaring a man an "unbeliever", who "illegally" divorces his wife, is so that the wife can use 1 Cor 7:15 to marry someone else - thus circumventing Mat 19:9. An "illegal" divorce is one that occurs for a reason other than "unfaithfullness". The portion of Mat 19:9 that is being circumvented is: "... and he who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.". If the wife can declare her ex-husband an unbeliever, there are those who believe she can exercise the escape clause in 1 Cor 7:15 ("Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.") and remarry without sin. I've always said "Two Wrongs don't make a Right". In the case cited, a wife should follow 1 Cor 7:10-11 (".. remain unmarried or reconcile to her husband"). But instead, risks her salvation by committing sin - perhaps out of vengence. The bottom line is still the same - one person's sin causes that of another. Mat 5:32 said so: "but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery". It is my opinion, after examining the factual evidence, that the "Biblical" blueprint for marriage has been long abandoned and adulterated. Unfortuntely some of our spiritual leaders have unwittingly(?) contributed to this problem through their ministries and their actions. The part |
||||||
15 | I'm confused about salvation | Matt 19:9 | JuanMas | 114709 | ||
Thank you for your response. On previous posts I have noted how some Christians use 1 Cor 7:15 as justification for remarrying inspite of Mat 19:9. Specifically, they arbitrarily declare the Christian spouse initiating the "illegal" divorce as an "unbeliever". Then they apply 1 Cor 7:15 to justify the "innocent" spouse remarrying. In my humble opinion, this is simply "an end around play" to circumvent Mat 19:9 and 1 Cor 7:10-11. I'm not saying that those who do this are malicious in their intent. They truly believe that they are correct in their actions. The blue-print for marriage found in the Bible does work. Unfortunately, it is being adulterated by those who "should" know better but spread misinformation anyway. |
||||||
16 | what advice can you offer christian with | 1 Cor 7:10 | JuanMas | 114411 | ||
My sister was greatly disappointed by her husband. She left him, but operates under the guidance of these verses (1 Cor 7:10-11). She works and is financially independent of him today. Your friend can do the same. It won't be easy. She can remarry under the following circumstances: 1. She becomes a widow(Rom 7:2). or 2. If her husband is an unbeliever and he divorces/abandons her. (1 Cor 7:15) |
||||||
17 | what advice can you offer christian with | 1 Cor 7:10 | JuanMas | 114409 | ||
My sister was greatly disappointed by her husband. She left him, but operates under the guidance of this verse. She works and is financially independent of him today. Your friend can do the same. It won't be easy. She can remarry under the following circumstances: 1. She becomes a widow(Rom 7:2). or 2. If her husband is an unbeliever and he divorces/abandons her. (1 Cor 7:15) |
||||||
18 | I'm confused about salvation | Matt 19:9 | JuanMas | 114360 | ||
I appreciate your explanation but please explain something to me. What's confusing to me is the notion of forgiveness. Why would Jesus say that "he who marries her who is divorced commits adultery"? (Mat 19:9). He even told the adulterous wife to "go and sin no more". I don't believe Jesus was inconsistent during his ministry. What he said early on was not contradicted by what he said later. My observation has been that from a practical perspective, many Christians find themselves caught in what I refer to as the "cycle of sin". This cycle consists of committing a sin, praying for forgiveness, living ok for a while then sinning again - repeating the cycle. An example of this is the "pedofile priest" situation in the Catholic Church. A priest commits a sin; is admonished; he prays for forgiveness; resumes his Church duties and ultimately sins again - thus repeating the cycle. Under the notion of forgiveness, it is said that you "become a new creature". But unfortunately in my opinion, some have taken this "too literally" and that's why the "pedofile priests" have been able to continue the "cycle of sin". So I'm confused. Why did Jesus state these rules for living if he knew you would not be held accountable? Is there a limit to the "cycle of sin"? How many times can one "knowingly" sin, seek forgiveness, et al and get a way with it? In the senario presented, my interpretation would have been that the "illegally" divorced wife would be required to follow 1 Cor 7:10-11. Mat 19:9 clearly states that "anyone who marries her who is divorced commits adultery". So in the situation in which one commits the sin anyway, what should one do? Go and sin no more! My understanding(?) is that receiving salvation wipes away the sin - puts you in a restored state prior to the sin. So in this case,"go and sin no more" would mean remain single or reconcile to your husband. If you become a widow in the mean time, you will be free to remarry. I would also hope that your husband would be willing to reconcile with you and end the state of adultery he is in. Some will say that this is harsh. However, my response would be to say "Just because your husband sinned doesn't mean that you have to sin also and risk your salvation". Or as others have put it, "Two wrongs don't make a right". If Jesus sacrificed his life for you, the least you can do is make the necessary sacrifices to remain righteous. |
||||||
19 | can the abused wife (spouse) remarry? | 1 Cor 7:15 | JuanMas | 113645 | ||
You are right. If a wife finds that she must leave her husband, 1 Cor 7:10-11 tells her what she must do. "But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband.(but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not divorce his wife." So you don't have to stay and take the abuse - however divorce and remarriage to another is a different story. |
||||||
20 | re-marraige yes or no | 1 Cor 7:15 | JuanMas | 113644 | ||
When you have children as is your case, a greater sin would be to abandon your new family. I certainly would not have advised divorce. Without the children, my answer would be different - "go and sin no more". | ||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |