Results 1 - 8 of 8
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | EmethAlethia | 233628 | ||
First, thank you for your post. While it is true that I intentionally did not list all of the scriptures, my primary reason for doing so was to have those with an interest in this question actually dig up all of the passages, that really do pertain, for themselves. To summarize that the final Christian view of adultery should be the destruction of a marriage relationship that is existing to form another, "might" be accurate. And that, from a scriptural standpoint, there is not any command not to take multiple wives might also be accurate, even though there are some obscure passages that do discuss the issue: If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) One might also say that from a "Head of the Family" perspective, or "Headship" position, Christ is not the head of one wife, but, from that perspective, the church, all of us men He is Head over, is far more representative of a polygamous family. From the perspective of individual relationships with those He loves, and their interactions with each other. The figurative language of the church being the bride (singular) is different than the literal language, "Christ is the head of every man, ...". While people sometimes want to make more of passages than they actually present is universally true for everyone, myself included, at times. Although I believe the urge to create meaning is something I should try and resist, when core issues integral to "who I am" are under attack, sometimes by the word of God itself, Resisting the "need" to read meaning into passages I could "use" to support my beliefs if I was more liberal in my interpretations, is often very hard indeed. That said, taking passages like: Gen 2:24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. to mean that God only meant for marriage to b between one man and one woman, does allow for me to fit in with most conservative Christian belief groups, and, concluding that it is merely stating that from now on, men will leave their existing households, to have sex, and that this pattern was established for all time, at this point, with no additional meaning, might preclude me from being accepted as a teacher at many churches. For this reason, the temptation to add the meaning that God intended marriage to always be one woman, and one man, and to ignore the later view, is quite appealing. Appealing as it is, to "fit in" with my peers by saying Ephesians 5 and Gen 2:24 support only one man and one woman, to do so seems to require stretching the meaning out of the bounds of what the rest of the scriptures, and what Godly men and women practiced in biblical times. If God only intended for it to be this way, why doesn't He say so, and why give commands like the one in Ex. 21: 7-11 mentioned earlier. I do understand the desire to fit in, and the cost of appearing rebellious. That said, my desire is to accept scripture as it is, not lop off edges and solder on meanings to make my beliefs more acceptable to others. The personal cost to my integrity would be far greater than the cost of persecution by the more “conservative” church leaders. I must live with myself, first and foremost, after all. If, without the need to make the scriptures seem to support an idea they do not support, you have scriptures that DO support a need for me to alter my beliefs from what I see taught, and done, throughout the scriptures, I am all for altering what is now my personal view. All the negatives go away if I am in agreement with all conservative Christian leaders, after all. It would be a “painless” conversion, with little cost, and tremendous gain. |
||||||
2 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 233633 | ||
Emethalethia, I disagree finally on the way to answer this question but I recognize that you are sincerely trying to make sense of scripture and I respect that. However, let me caution you not to fall into one particular mistake. Just because others face less hostility for holding to the more normal view on this, do not think that others are coming to a different interpretation of scriptural evidence on this issue that they are doing so out of an urge to avoid negative social consequences. As long as another's actions allow us to believe the best of them, we are bound in christian charity to do so. Therefore we ought to assume that they would be willing to follow their beliefs into persecution, only sincere opinion has happen to place them with the majority. As you have given me no reason to assume you do anything but give the benefit of the doubt, I assume you agree with the sentiment. Now with regard to considering your view, what do you make of 1 Timothy chapter three requiring elders to be a "one woman man"? What does it mean, and why is this obligation placed upon them? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
3 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | EmethAlethia | 233634 | ||
1Ti 3:2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 1Ti 3:12 Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households. These, of course, are limitations placed on otherwise good Christian people, that if they choose to have multiple wives, they already have too large a family to be able to effectively work with the family of God as well. Again, if there was no issue with people taking multiple wives, there is no reason to even bring up the idea. If no one ever got drunk, being overly fond of wine would not be an issue. This is not a condemnation of having multiple wives, it is a restriction upon those who are Christian who do want to take multiple wives, excluding them, not from the Christian body, but from areas of service that do take a major amount of work, dedication, and the lives, of those that desire these positions. Let me state that in areas where the law precludes polygamy, no Christian should ever pursue the issue of polygamy in this country, or any other that does not allow for it, as there is no "Command of God" to be a polygamist, and we are commanded to obey the laws of the land. To summarize, these 2 verses are merely restrictions upon those Christians who wish to take multiple wives. A practice that must have occured, but which, according to these verses, restricts them to non leadership roles in the church. In no place does it indicate that multiple wives are "sin", or that the issue should be avoided by Christians, but rather that that choice will limit their leadership options. As always, I am more than willing to consider something else as meaning, but I do believe that again, we would have to add meaning not clearly given in the passage in order to come to those other meanings. That said, without removing meaning, or adding any, what do you do with this passage where God is reproving David for his sin of adultery, i.e. taking the wife of a man still living: 2Sa 12:7 Nathan then said to David, "You are the man! Thus says the LORD God of Israel, 'It is I who anointed you king over Israel and it is I who delivered you from the hand of Saul. 2Sa 12:8 'I also gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your care, and I gave you the house of Israel and Judah; and if that had been too little, I would have added to you many more things like these! Does God participate in sin, and enable it? Does God not care one way or the other how many wives we have? Or does the passage have a different meaning than taking this passage at face value would imply? Lastly, why are our beliefs so important that we are willing to add, subtract, and distort the meaning of passages of scripture to force them to line up with our beliefs? As I stated, I am more than happy to get rid of my beliefs, based on scripture, on this issue, as long as I do not have to become a scriptural contortionist twisting the meaning to force it to conform to what I would rather believe. In truth, that which we love most will always be forced to conform to that which we love most. I have a saying: Most people honestly seek after truth the way most people honestly seek after things to step into in the farm yard. COme to think of it, most people have similar reactions when they find it as well. Kicking against the goads of truth is not an uncommon practice. I have had many a perfectly good belief destroyed by the clearly taught truths of scripture, and I have to admit, my beliefs do not change easilly. Being tossed to and fro with every wind and wave of doctrine is not my problem. That said, I am willing to alter my beliefs if the undistorted truth supports the need for a change. That you dislike my belief is clear. The evidence I see only lines up one way, unless we try and force it into a different hole lopping of meaning, adding meaning not there, or distorting it to fit our beliefs. |
||||||
4 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 233642 | ||
Emeth, It is clear to me that you have had some rough conversations regarding this topic in the past. This topic is not worth quarreling over in my estimate. I feel like you have gotten so used to being attacked by those who feel threatened by what you are saying that you have come into this discussion with your "dukes up" so to speak. Therefore, I see no reason to continue this conversation. I end my participation of this thread with no harsh feelings and I hope you are a long fruitful participant on the forum. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
5 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | EmethAlethia | 233643 | ||
Beja, Sorry for the double post. I feel no threat, but there are a large number of people who do respond as those in Mat. 7:6 do, and there is a command of God not to continue comunicating with them, which does require judgment on the part of all Christians. With the first 5 verses, and the rest of the passage, in context carefully considered as well. If you have passages or interpretations that fit with the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Cultural context, context surrounding each passage, of each the passages being considered, ... and we can stick to those I doubt we will see any issues like those in Mat. 7:6 that would cause a need to break fellowship. That said, in the last year, there have been a number of people who have just gotten angry and refused to let anyone discuss with me, simply because of the topic and the questions on the passages. (Dogs), and there have been others that just did a surface sniff at the issue, and went away without any real serious dialog, careful examination of passages, meaning of words, ... or any real discussion as well because there was nothing fruitful or of interest to them. If you choose to walk away, I can appreciate that as well. God bless. |
||||||
6 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | DocTrinsograce | 233651 | ||
Dear Emeth, To be certain that there is no "surface sniffing" of the issue, might I suggest that you search the forum on the topics of which you are focused. You will find that they are nothing new -- goodness, no. You will further find much there to digest on the topic. Following that preparatory study, perhaps you would like to ask questions of a more narrow nature. Sweeping generalities tend to render sweepingly general responses. Which thing, does not render value to any of us. Finally, be prepared to listen to what people have to say from differing backgrounds. Despite what one particular forum participant has said -- a unique minority of one, by the way -- our gracious host, Lockman, wants us to interact with tolerance -- see the Terms of Use that you agreed to when you created your forum profile. The intent is that our diversity in Christendom will yield a variety of views; not that we will always agree, but in this way greater understanding will arise. Thank you for cooperating with Lockman and showing deference and respect for their provision of this forum, and for the many participants. In Him, Doc |
||||||
7 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | EmethAlethia | 233652 | ||
So far, I have offered many passages, and have answered questions on others that were brought up as to what I see as to their meaning. Is there anyone who wishes to offer any passages, and the meaning they believe those passages have, n comparison to all the other passages that pertain, in context, and what was done by God, and His people? If so, state your passages and your beliefs as a result of your interpretation, and we can discuss. The target is not likemindedness with my beliefs, or likemindedness with those of others who disagree with me. THe target is likemindedness with the truth, with the mind of Christ. I sincerely believe this. That said, any "contention, other than for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints, is meaningless. |
||||||
8 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | EdB | 233655 | ||
EmethAlethia I made at least two posts today to you on this thread and the other. I can't find them so something must have happened to them. I will not repeat them however I will observe you experience to see if it agrees with my posts. Incidently you raise interesting questions, questions that require critical thinking I applaud your search for truth. |
||||||