Exodus Chapter 20:Vers.17 the tenth commandment: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
Romans Chapter 12: verse 1-2 Present your bodies a living sacrifice. An be not conformed to the ways of this world. But be Ye transformed by the renewing of your mind. So that you can prove that Gods will is good & acceptable & perfect. :)
Hinduism is the only major faith to give equality to women - Just like the male Trinity there is the Female Trinity - Saraswati, Laxmi & Durga. No other religion says God is Woman. Every Hindu is familiar with the famous Ardhanariswara (Half Male-Half Female) form of God Siva - emphasizing that Husband & Wife are equal partners. It is ironic that newer religions have demoted women to a second-class status.
@ramaraksha01: Half man and half woman is not of man and wife, but is Satan himself. Please study for he is a mix of both sexes, look at the image of baphomet. Male groin w/ female chest.
@QuietBuck It is a depiction to make us think, it's not reality. Please get a cure for your brainwashing. It's just a book written by men living 2,000 years ago - they wrote fairy stories, they are not real.
@ramaraksha01: As a minister I am glad you are not part of my congregation as then I am not responsible for your utter lukewarmness. And being an ex-atheist then witnessing some 17 items, you are on the wrong planet speaking to me.
Revelation 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
@ramaraksha01 Interesting points :) but Not true anymore. Much of mainline Christianity will affirm that assinging God a male gender is about how the bible could describe God to the people in a way they could understand. There are many images God's femminine qualities in the Bible. God is infitately more femminine than the most feminine woman, and infinately more masculine than the most masculine guy. Gender is an earthly thing. God is a spiritual being with no gender.
@ChloeTurmoil the good cop, bad cop routine. Instead of talking to me maybe u should talk to ur fellow christians like this quietbuck guy or maybe to the pope who says God cannot be a woman.
But u make a good point - these images & words used are not to be taken literally. Makes u think who are the real idolators. We are as much praying to an idol as the jews are praying to a wall & the muslims are praying to a curtain & christians are praying to a book
Rikizzz, I think MANY are starting to have questions on this issue and the answers most are getting do not appear to line up with scripture. It is very important then to not look to man, but to God and His Word---He will expose error and how man is not applying His word properly or with the right heart (His Heart). Blessings.
Piper teaches very confusing things in regards to the permanancy of marriage. He teaches that marriage IS permanent----that adultery doesn't dissolve the original marriage, divorce doesn't dissolve the original marriage, yet he also teaches that if one DOES remarry (commits adultery), they are to STAY in the relationship Jesus Himself declared adultery.
His basis is that to divorce would also be sin, because Scripture does not authorise this - two wrongs don't make a right. He exhorts such folk to accept that they sinned in entering that remarriage but that it is still a valid marriage (cf the woman at the well) and that they ought to seek God's blessing once they acknowledge that they were wrong to enter into it. It is very difficult but would you really advocate that the couple divorce - even when there are children?!?
The woman at the well is not a good example to legitimize adulterous remarriages because Jesus never addresses the nature of those "marriages" as being right or wrong. Where we do have a perfect example is Herod/Heriodias. Their divorces and remarriage did not dissolve Herodias' previous marriage to Philip. John called her Philip's wife. The only way to "repent" of adultery, is to forsake the relationship, not redefine it as Mr. Piper is trying to do. Was not Jesus' labelling enough?
M400, As for leaving a second union being impossible, I personally know of many that HAVE or are in the process of doing just that due to conviction and seeing that their second unions are adultery according to God's own Word on the issue. I find it quite interesting that people have a hard time with forsaking a relationship Jesus says is adultery, but they see nothing wrong with remaining separated from the one God joined them to----they one they DIDN'T commit adultery with by marrying.
Deut 24:4 makes it clear that the original marriage should not be resumed - and Christ nowhere cancelled this OT law. While I can accept the argument that one should leave an adulterous second marriage (even if the spouse wishes one to stay and the children are left without a father, causing unbelievers to blaspheme God and the cause of Christ?), I don't think there is any justification for going back to the original spouse. You also might want to read Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure.
Do unbelievers blaspheme Christ because "Christians" have higher divorce rates (from the ONE FLESH marriage joined by God) than the unsaved? I think they would much more understand us REPENTING from adultery and suffering the ramifications of our disobedience than they understand flat out disobedience to God by divorcing our spouses then entering into adulterous relationships. There IS justification to going back to one's spouse: "Let not man separate what God has joined together".
On your last point, that cannot be inferred from the Matt 19 verse. When did Jesus ever say anything to clarify or contradict Deut 24:4? If it was an abomination to God then, why not still? It seems clear to me - once there is adultery, there should not be further defilement with a remarriage to the original spouse. Where this leaves sexual relations after adultery had been committed and the wronged party has forgiven the erring spouse is a moot point...
Why can it NOT be inferred? That is what Jesus plainly stated-- the "let not" is a command, just as I Cor. 7:10-11 is. Concerning further defilement, what do you do with Hosea/Gomer, David/Michal, Herodias/Philip?....all of these wives were viewed by God as belonging to their ORIGINAL spouses---in spite of adultery or new vows taken with other men. Fact is that God permitted in the OT era many different forms of adultery (polygamy/remarriage). Jesus brought marriage back to "the beginning".
Because Deut 24:4 refers to such return as an abomination - doesn't sound like part of a "toleration" period, does it? As far as Hosea/Gomer and David/Michal go, the marriage vows were still there, so forgiveness and restoration were appropriate. In the Deut 24:4 scenario, it would seem that it was "back to base" and a fresh start, so to speak (because of the initial divorce) and it would be adultery to marry a woman who had already been in a sexual relationship? How do you read that verse?
Michal MARRIED another man...........so did Herodias (she divorced Philip according to Josephus' record). So in those 2 instances, new vows did NOT dissolve the original marriage---NOR did adultery with the new men. So, the reality is that new vow taking NOR adultery causes the "abomination", so what then is the abomination?? Could it be a MAN'S flippant use of divorce to rid himself of his wife and then him wanting her back when she had been with another man? Read Jer. 3:1
That's just the verse I was thinking of! I agree with much of what you say, but - on the assumption that the original wife had not been unfaithful and it was some flippant reason the man had for leaving her, isn't the LORD protecting HER from being defiled?
Sorry for not seeing this seven months ago - Jesus did refer to those relationships as marriages - if he didn't think they were valid marriages, then surely he would have said that she had to go back to husband no 1? I accept that it is a hugely difficult topic but I find it impossible to believe that forsaking a second marriage (and children) is the biblical response, as it is not referred to in 1 Cor 7, where Paul refers to just about every scenario under the sun.
M400, Jesus made it clear that she was in sin with the man she was with. We also have to acknowledge that Jesus made it clear in His teachings on divorce/remarriage that when one remarries AFTER a divorce, they don't enter a legitimate marriage, but instead are practicing adultery (having unlawful relations with one who is NOT your spouse). That IS the definition of adultery. One can't be in a legitimate marriage AND be committing adultery---it's impossible.
The man the woman at the well was with was not her husband - she was to cease that relationship - but Jesus does not tell her to go back to her first husband - and nowhere else does he, Paul or anyone else tell us to do that if we have remarried - Paul's teaching about a departing spouse remaining unmarried or being reconciled to her husband implies celibacy during the separation.
Point is this: Jesus labels remarriage---adultery. Jesus let the woman at the well knew she was in sin-----her forsaking the relationship is a given. Why, if Jesus labels another relationship as sin do we then say we have to have His direct word on what to? Are we not called to confess AND forsake our sin in order to be forgiven? Also, there is NO 3rd option given if one does "depart"..........if they do marry another, they become adulterers. How do adulterers repent?
Agreed - but why does Jesus refer to her previous four lovers as "husbands", if he does not recognise these adulterous relationships as marriages (however badly entered into)? Adulterers repent by no longer committing adultery. How about celibacy within their relationship?
See, that's the thing, she was part of the OT program(the "toleration" period). Maybe she was "legally" married to each man. Maybe she took other women's husbands as her own----as Herodias did, maybe all her previous husbands died and now she was living in fornication. We don't know for sure. All we can do is speculate. Celibate, yes, but to remain in the marriage when God sees a person belonging to another is not right. It gives others a false impression of one's marital status, IMHO.
Many commentators believe she was barren and that's why she had so many husbands - they dumped her when she couldn't conceive. So do you believe that the kids from that family should have to suffer through the loss of a father's support (in every way) through no fault of their own? How is that fulfilling the law of love?
What about the kids of an original marriage, M400fan?? The Lord loves all children, from 1st marriages and those born out of adultery, but which WOMAN, in the Lord's eyes, should this man be dwelling with and raising his children with? Unfortunately, due to a woman's/man's sin, many children are suffering that God did not intend to suffer. Let me just say this though, if one truly is a father--in adultery or not, they will take care of their children---covenant AND those born of adultery.
In most cases, they will have gone with the first wife. What if SHE went off with another man and her husband is left heartbroken? What if he therefore CANNOT go back to his original wife and children because there is a new husband and stepfather? But I agree with you that one can still truly be a father even when divorced - but the constant presence and power to influence daily will have gone and that is a great tragedy, especially if the first wife has apostasised and married an unbeliever.
If one cannot "go back" because their original spouse has now entered into a sinful relationship, the one who has repented "remains unmarried", serving the Lord, being a parent to their children, then most importantly: PRAYS for their wayward spouse to ALSO repent and return to the Lord and to the covenant they made for life. Only when more and more people do this will the tide turn regarding marrying divorced persons or getting "remarried" while one has a living spouse. Blessings
Piper teaches very confusing things in regards to the permanancy of marriage. He teaches that marriage IS permanent----that adultery doesn't dissolve the original marriage, divorce doesn't dissolve the original marriage, yet he also teaches that if one DOES remarry (commits adultery), they are to STAY in the relationship Jesus Himself declared adultery.
This has been flagged as spam show
Exodus Chapter 20:Vers.17 the tenth commandment: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
brotherfrank62 5 months ago in playlist preaching the word of God
This has been flagged as spam show
Romans Chapter 12: verse 1-2 Present your bodies a living sacrifice. An be not conformed to the ways of this world. But be Ye transformed by the renewing of your mind. So that you can prove that Gods will is good & acceptable & perfect. :)
brotherfrank62 8 months ago in playlist preaching the word of God
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOORRRRRE
evidenceonly 1 year ago
Hinduism is the only major faith to give equality to women - Just like the male Trinity there is the Female Trinity - Saraswati, Laxmi & Durga. No other religion says God is Woman. Every Hindu is familiar with the famous Ardhanariswara (Half Male-Half Female) form of God Siva - emphasizing that Husband & Wife are equal partners. It is ironic that newer religions have demoted women to a second-class status.
ramaraksha01 1 year ago
@ramaraksha01: Half man and half woman is not of man and wife, but is Satan himself. Please study for he is a mix of both sexes, look at the image of baphomet. Male groin w/ female chest.
QuietBuck 1 year ago
@QuietBuck It is a depiction to make us think, it's not reality. Please get a cure for your brainwashing. It's just a book written by men living 2,000 years ago - they wrote fairy stories, they are not real.
ramaraksha01 1 year ago
@ramaraksha01: As a minister I am glad you are not part of my congregation as then I am not responsible for your utter lukewarmness. And being an ex-atheist then witnessing some 17 items, you are on the wrong planet speaking to me.
Revelation 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
QuietBuck 1 year ago
@ramaraksha01 Interesting points :) but Not true anymore. Much of mainline Christianity will affirm that assinging God a male gender is about how the bible could describe God to the people in a way they could understand. There are many images God's femminine qualities in the Bible. God is infitately more femminine than the most feminine woman, and infinately more masculine than the most masculine guy. Gender is an earthly thing. God is a spiritual being with no gender.
ChloeTurmoil 7 months ago
@ChloeTurmoil the good cop, bad cop routine. Instead of talking to me maybe u should talk to ur fellow christians like this quietbuck guy or maybe to the pope who says God cannot be a woman.
But u make a good point - these images & words used are not to be taken literally. Makes u think who are the real idolators. We are as much praying to an idol as the jews are praying to a wall & the muslims are praying to a curtain & christians are praying to a book
ramaraksha01 7 months ago
Rikizzz, I think MANY are starting to have questions on this issue and the answers most are getting do not appear to line up with scripture. It is very important then to not look to man, but to God and His Word---He will expose error and how man is not applying His word properly or with the right heart (His Heart). Blessings.
lastblast7 3 years ago
Piper teaches very confusing things in regards to the permanancy of marriage. He teaches that marriage IS permanent----that adultery doesn't dissolve the original marriage, divorce doesn't dissolve the original marriage, yet he also teaches that if one DOES remarry (commits adultery), they are to STAY in the relationship Jesus Himself declared adultery.
lastblast7 3 years ago
His basis is that to divorce would also be sin, because Scripture does not authorise this - two wrongs don't make a right. He exhorts such folk to accept that they sinned in entering that remarriage but that it is still a valid marriage (cf the woman at the well) and that they ought to seek God's blessing once they acknowledge that they were wrong to enter into it. It is very difficult but would you really advocate that the couple divorce - even when there are children?!?
M400fan 3 years ago
The woman at the well is not a good example to legitimize adulterous remarriages because Jesus never addresses the nature of those "marriages" as being right or wrong. Where we do have a perfect example is Herod/Heriodias. Their divorces and remarriage did not dissolve Herodias' previous marriage to Philip. John called her Philip's wife. The only way to "repent" of adultery, is to forsake the relationship, not redefine it as Mr. Piper is trying to do. Was not Jesus' labelling enough?
lastblast7 3 years ago
Interesting! I would like to see more responses to your comments as I too was having concerns on this issue.
Thanks for bringing up this topic!
rikizzz 3 years ago
M400, As for leaving a second union being impossible, I personally know of many that HAVE or are in the process of doing just that due to conviction and seeing that their second unions are adultery according to God's own Word on the issue. I find it quite interesting that people have a hard time with forsaking a relationship Jesus says is adultery, but they see nothing wrong with remaining separated from the one God joined them to----they one they DIDN'T commit adultery with by marrying.
lastblast7 2 years ago
Deut 24:4 makes it clear that the original marriage should not be resumed - and Christ nowhere cancelled this OT law. While I can accept the argument that one should leave an adulterous second marriage (even if the spouse wishes one to stay and the children are left without a father, causing unbelievers to blaspheme God and the cause of Christ?), I don't think there is any justification for going back to the original spouse. You also might want to read Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure.
M400fan 2 years ago
Do unbelievers blaspheme Christ because "Christians" have higher divorce rates (from the ONE FLESH marriage joined by God) than the unsaved? I think they would much more understand us REPENTING from adultery and suffering the ramifications of our disobedience than they understand flat out disobedience to God by divorcing our spouses then entering into adulterous relationships. There IS justification to going back to one's spouse: "Let not man separate what God has joined together".
lastblast7 2 years ago
On your last point, that cannot be inferred from the Matt 19 verse. When did Jesus ever say anything to clarify or contradict Deut 24:4? If it was an abomination to God then, why not still? It seems clear to me - once there is adultery, there should not be further defilement with a remarriage to the original spouse. Where this leaves sexual relations after adultery had been committed and the wronged party has forgiven the erring spouse is a moot point...
M400fan 2 years ago
Why can it NOT be inferred? That is what Jesus plainly stated-- the "let not" is a command, just as I Cor. 7:10-11 is. Concerning further defilement, what do you do with Hosea/Gomer, David/Michal, Herodias/Philip?....all of these wives were viewed by God as belonging to their ORIGINAL spouses---in spite of adultery or new vows taken with other men. Fact is that God permitted in the OT era many different forms of adultery (polygamy/remarriage). Jesus brought marriage back to "the beginning".
lastblast7 2 years ago
Because Deut 24:4 refers to such return as an abomination - doesn't sound like part of a "toleration" period, does it? As far as Hosea/Gomer and David/Michal go, the marriage vows were still there, so forgiveness and restoration were appropriate. In the Deut 24:4 scenario, it would seem that it was "back to base" and a fresh start, so to speak (because of the initial divorce) and it would be adultery to marry a woman who had already been in a sexual relationship? How do you read that verse?
M400fan 2 years ago
Michal MARRIED another man...........so did Herodias (she divorced Philip according to Josephus' record). So in those 2 instances, new vows did NOT dissolve the original marriage---NOR did adultery with the new men. So, the reality is that new vow taking NOR adultery causes the "abomination", so what then is the abomination?? Could it be a MAN'S flippant use of divorce to rid himself of his wife and then him wanting her back when she had been with another man? Read Jer. 3:1
lastblast7 2 years ago
That's just the verse I was thinking of! I agree with much of what you say, but - on the assumption that the original wife had not been unfaithful and it was some flippant reason the man had for leaving her, isn't the LORD protecting HER from being defiled?
M400fan 2 years ago
Sorry for not seeing this seven months ago - Jesus did refer to those relationships as marriages - if he didn't think they were valid marriages, then surely he would have said that she had to go back to husband no 1? I accept that it is a hugely difficult topic but I find it impossible to believe that forsaking a second marriage (and children) is the biblical response, as it is not referred to in 1 Cor 7, where Paul refers to just about every scenario under the sun.
M400fan 2 years ago
M400, Jesus made it clear that she was in sin with the man she was with. We also have to acknowledge that Jesus made it clear in His teachings on divorce/remarriage that when one remarries AFTER a divorce, they don't enter a legitimate marriage, but instead are practicing adultery (having unlawful relations with one who is NOT your spouse). That IS the definition of adultery. One can't be in a legitimate marriage AND be committing adultery---it's impossible.
lastblast7 2 years ago
The man the woman at the well was with was not her husband - she was to cease that relationship - but Jesus does not tell her to go back to her first husband - and nowhere else does he, Paul or anyone else tell us to do that if we have remarried - Paul's teaching about a departing spouse remaining unmarried or being reconciled to her husband implies celibacy during the separation.
M400fan 2 years ago
Point is this: Jesus labels remarriage---adultery. Jesus let the woman at the well knew she was in sin-----her forsaking the relationship is a given. Why, if Jesus labels another relationship as sin do we then say we have to have His direct word on what to? Are we not called to confess AND forsake our sin in order to be forgiven? Also, there is NO 3rd option given if one does "depart"..........if they do marry another, they become adulterers. How do adulterers repent?
lastblast7 2 years ago
Agreed - but why does Jesus refer to her previous four lovers as "husbands", if he does not recognise these adulterous relationships as marriages (however badly entered into)? Adulterers repent by no longer committing adultery. How about celibacy within their relationship?
M400fan 2 years ago
See, that's the thing, she was part of the OT program(the "toleration" period). Maybe she was "legally" married to each man. Maybe she took other women's husbands as her own----as Herodias did, maybe all her previous husbands died and now she was living in fornication. We don't know for sure. All we can do is speculate. Celibate, yes, but to remain in the marriage when God sees a person belonging to another is not right. It gives others a false impression of one's marital status, IMHO.
lastblast7 2 years ago
Many commentators believe she was barren and that's why she had so many husbands - they dumped her when she couldn't conceive. So do you believe that the kids from that family should have to suffer through the loss of a father's support (in every way) through no fault of their own? How is that fulfilling the law of love?
M400fan 2 years ago
What about the kids of an original marriage, M400fan?? The Lord loves all children, from 1st marriages and those born out of adultery, but which WOMAN, in the Lord's eyes, should this man be dwelling with and raising his children with? Unfortunately, due to a woman's/man's sin, many children are suffering that God did not intend to suffer. Let me just say this though, if one truly is a father--in adultery or not, they will take care of their children---covenant AND those born of adultery.
lastblast7 2 years ago
In most cases, they will have gone with the first wife. What if SHE went off with another man and her husband is left heartbroken? What if he therefore CANNOT go back to his original wife and children because there is a new husband and stepfather? But I agree with you that one can still truly be a father even when divorced - but the constant presence and power to influence daily will have gone and that is a great tragedy, especially if the first wife has apostasised and married an unbeliever.
M400fan 2 years ago
If one cannot "go back" because their original spouse has now entered into a sinful relationship, the one who has repented "remains unmarried", serving the Lord, being a parent to their children, then most importantly: PRAYS for their wayward spouse to ALSO repent and return to the Lord and to the covenant they made for life. Only when more and more people do this will the tide turn regarding marrying divorced persons or getting "remarried" while one has a living spouse. Blessings
lastblast7 2 years ago
Piper teaches very confusing things in regards to the permanancy of marriage. He teaches that marriage IS permanent----that adultery doesn't dissolve the original marriage, divorce doesn't dissolve the original marriage, yet he also teaches that if one DOES remarry (commits adultery), they are to STAY in the relationship Jesus Himself declared adultery.
lastblast7 3 years ago