Would you go to your brothers 2nd wedding after he commited adultery?

[PS95]

So what is repentance for a person that committed adultery and gets married?
And how should his friends, family, and church react to this?

Aahhhh GH-
I wrote a lot about this on here.. I guess you haven't read any of it.-
Briefly- I wrote that I would have to speak with him about it- sharing pertinent scriptures. ( IF he was a brother in Christ) If he is asking me to witness his wedding and celebrate it with him - I would think that we must have a relationship where I could inquire about things this personal. Paul taught not to keep company with unrepentant sinners in the church. -A wedding is a very intimate event where they are requesting God's blessing and ours.
I think it needs to be taken as seriously & as sacred as the Lord does.
We , as a culture have become hardened to it.

If he said that he felt terrible about it- prayed about it- asked his wife's forgiveness & attempted reconciliation with her.. but she refused-
vs something like--
If he said he just wasn't happy and was attracted to someone else...

To be perfectly honest- scripturally speaking I am not totally sure if he should remarry at all . It's not very clear to me.
But-- if he seemed truly sorry- I would let it go. Forgiveness & mercy are paramount.

Assuming, he was my flesh brother and a believer- I think I would maybe already know those answers and would not need to bring it up..
but if a brother in Christ only- maybe not. So, I would speak with him..

The video was vague and people's answers are based on not having enough info!
Some thought he is just a sibling /not a believer- some thought he was both- others thought he was a brother in Christ only. All of that matters.

 

[Grailhunter]

Aahhhh GH-
I wrote a lot about this on here.. I guess you haven't read any of it.-
Briefly- I wrote that I would have to speak with him about it- sharing pertinent scriptures. ( IF he was a brother in Christ) If he is asking me to witness his wedding and celebrate it with him - I would think that we must have a relationship where I could inquire about things this personal. Paul taught not to keep company with unrepentant sinners in the church. -A wedding is a very intimate event where they are requesting God's blessing and ours.
I think it needs to be taken as seriously & as sacred as the Lord does.
We , as a culture have become hardened to it.

If he said that he felt terrible about it- prayed about it- asked his wife's forgiveness & attempted reconciliation with her.. but she refused-
vs something like--
If he said he just wasn't happy and was attracted to someone else...

To be perfectly honest- scripturally speaking I am not totally sure if he should remarry at all . It's not very clear to me.
But-- if he seemed truly sorry- I would let it go. Forgiveness & mercy are paramount.

Assuming, he was my flesh brother and a believer- I think I would maybe already know those answers and would not need to bring it up..
but if a brother in Christ only- maybe not. So, I would speak with him..

The video was vague and people's answers are based on not having enough info!
Some thought he is just a sibling /not a believer- some thought he was both- others thought he was a brother in Christ only. All of that matters.

This is actually a complex and deep topic....and you are not going to like it, but religion is not about what we like and dislike. I have covered this topic extensively in college in more than one country.
Is seems easier to punch him in the nose and go to the wedding.
Wouldn't it be neat if we had a repentant meter on our forehead.
This topic is not well defined in the scriptures, which leaves questions and maybe not be enough to condemn someone. Particularly since that sin, is between him and Yeshua.

Somethings that Paul said people debate....in Corinthians Chapter 7 Paul said simply....Do not look for a wife.....is this a command. Chapter 7 looks to have commands and advise so we have to sort them out. In chapter 7 Paul advocates celibacy....Is that truly the better way. Celibate religions die out.

I will say this overall, a lot of people do not take marriage and family important enough. And that is the over-riding thought I present here.

Debates and Questions
Again polygamy was never condemned or stopped in the scriptures, so the men could marry other women....Polygamy was common for centuries after the biblical era. Considering this a man only committed adultery if he had a one night stand. And in this case this man's intent was to marry.

Again I am going to remind you that in the Gospels----Yeshua---a Jew was talking to Jews about divorce in accordance with the Mosaic Law. These Jews could have several wives and Yeshua was essentially telling them, if they divorce one of their wives for any other reason than adultery they cannot marry again, but that still meant that some of them had wives. And also His own apostles had issues with what He said about divorce.

Either way, Christianity did not adopt the Jewish letter of divorce. And although your Bible may have the word divorce appearing outside the four Gospels, it actually does not. Either way divorce or "put away" the rules for men are different than women....And it does appear to me to be unfair....But it is not based on what we like or dislike.

So as I read all this, if a woman leaves her husband for any other reason other than adultery she cannot remarry. But for men if polygamy is still biblically lawful then adultery only apply to one night stands and men are free to take multiple wives. (Keep in mind back in those days divorcing a woman was almost a death sentence and she did not take her children.)

The complication is of course is that these people in this storyline are not playing by these rules. Christianity changed all this and by the middle ages polygamy and concubinage was condemned.....But not scripturally. Even Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not. In this case, would it have been better for the man to take on a second wife than cause a divorce and a breakup of the family?

And as time went on Christianity add nearly 100 other sins that are not biblical. So this is all a debate.

There is still a lot to this that I have not brought up but I will say it again the marriage and the family are important.
Yeshua said....For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother 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.” Mark 10:8 and 9. This is God's intent and I agree. Now some people think this only applies to two people but God's Law...the Mosaic Law regulated polygamy.

Now what do I think, as I said I am a hard liner, I think not only should adultery carry prison time I think separations should be handled by a church. The civil process harms the adults and the children and causes a great deal of hate. But that is just a thought.

I do not like polygamy, but I agree with Martin Luther, I cannot condemn it. But I think it is better than divorce. As a whole, not a good practice but in some case a viable option. I know of a couple cases where it worked. Wife was paralyzed and even recommended her husband take a good friend of her's as a wife.

Then in the case of those couples living together......since biblically a ceremony is not required to be married....those together have not sinned but a lot of this applies to them too.

 

[amigo de christo]

This is actually a complex and deep topic....and you are not going to like it, but religion is not about what we like and dislike. I have covered this topic extensively in college in more than one country.
Is seems easier to punch him in the nose and go to the wedding.
Wouldn't it be neat if we had a repentant meter on our forehead.
This topic is not well defined in the scriptures, which leaves questions and maybe not be enough to condemn someone. Particularly since that sin, is between him and Yeshua.

Somethings that Paul said people debate....in Corinthians Chapter 7 Paul said simply....Do not look for a wife.....is this a command. Chapter 7 looks to have commands and advise so we have to sort them out. In chapter 7 Paul advocates celibacy....Is that truly the better way. Celibate religions die out.

I will say this overall, a lot of people do not take marriage and family important enough. And that is the over-riding thought I present here.

Debates and Questions
Again polygamy was never condemned or stopped in the scriptures, so the men could marry other women....Polygamy was common for centuries after the biblical era. Considering this a man only committed adultery if he had a one night stand. And in this case this man's intent was to marry.

Again I am going to remind you that in the Gospels----Yeshua---a Jew was talking to Jews about divorce in accordance with the Mosaic Law. These Jews could have several wives and Yeshua was essentially telling them, if they divorce one of their wives for any other reason than adultery they cannot marry again, but that still meant that some of them had wives. And also His own apostles had issues with what He said about divorce.

Either way, Christianity did not adopt the Jewish letter of divorce. And although your Bible may have the word divorce appearing outside the four Gospels, it actually does not. Either way divorce or "put away" the rules for men are different than women....And it does appear to me to be unfair....But it is not based on what we like or dislike.

So as I read all this, if a woman leaves her husband for any other reason other than adultery she cannot remarry. But for men if polygamy is still biblically lawful then adultery only apply to one night stands and men are free to take multiple wives. (Keep in mind back in those days divorcing a woman was almost a death sentence and she did not take her children.)

The complication is of course is that these people in this storyline are not playing by these rules. Christianity changed all this and by the middle ages polygamy and concubinage was condemned.....But not scripturally. Even Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not. In this case, would it have been better for the man to take on a second wife than cause a divorce and a breakup of the family?

And as time went on Christianity add nearly 100 other sins that are not biblical. So this is all a debate.

There is still a lot to this that I have not brought up but I will say it again the marriage and the family are important.
Yeshua said....For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother 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.” Mark 10:8 and 9. This is God's intent and I agree. Now some people think this only applies to two people but God's Law...the Mosaic Law regulated polygamy.

Now what do I think, as I said I am a hard liner, I think not only should adultery carry prison time I think separations should be handled by a church. The civil process harms the adults and the children and causes a great deal of hate. But that is just a thought.

I do not like polygamy, but I agree with Martin Luther, I cannot condemn it. But I think it is better than divorce. As a whole, not a good practice but in some case a viable option. I know of a couple cases where it worked. Wife was paralyzed and even recommended her husband take a good friend of her's as a wife.

Then in the case of those couples living together......since biblically a ceremony is not required to be married....those together have not sinned but a lot of this applies to them too.

chief , i heard your solution . two errors . one was instruction to PUNCH someone . THEN go ahead and go to the wedding .
BOTH accounts , DEAD wrong . I suggest we return to the bible and fast for to learn .

 

[amigo de christo]

To me i don't think your necessarily celebrating or condoning it just by attending.

There are other things that should be considered before making the decision.
Is he a brother in Christ? Did he repent? Who initiated the divorce? Did he try to reconcile?

We don't have the whole story so I voted for not sure.

If the brother is family, not a devout Christian, his wife initiated the divorce, he tried to reconcile with her, his sorry that it happened. Then sure I would attend.

If his a devout Christian, initiated the divorce, did not try to reconcile and did not repent after I had softly spoken to him then maybe I would not attend.

It's a tough question and these things, that we don't know about in this case, should be considered first because your relationship with this person will be really fractured if you don't attend. It might be better to just put away your opinion, your judgement and your pride and keep the peace, for we have all sinned after all

men gonna think as men gonna think . as for me i prefer to KNOW , and by know i mean the holy scriptures .
now if we read them often and daily you gonna see exactly how they were .
How and what instruction they gave to the church concerning correction and etc .
If any beleiver be a fornicator , an idoaltor , yes adulterer or etc
DO NOT even eat with such a one . SO going to their weddings of sin , NOT to be DONE .
UNLESS of course one desires to stand and say , YES i have a just cause for WHY they ought not to be married .
NOW IF one is led to do so , THEN GO and do so . DONT let me stop anyone from that .
BUT if we do , ITS WHAT WE MUST DO .
And i dont think JESUS worried about hiS F IRST encounters causing division either .
IN fact JESUS told them this . WHEN his own apostels told him , DONT you know you offended them .
JESUS did not say , OH DEAR , we need to sew up and patch up the relationship , we sure dont want them
being fractured .
HE told his own , LEAVE THEM ALONE . Every plant that MY FATHER has not planted SHALL be rooted up .
We are gonna find out , the more we read ABOUT JESUS , and later in acts , then later in the letters
and even in revelation . GOD AINT , JESUS AINT at all the way most think he is .
Nor were the apostels . THERE was not judge not correct not mentality .
IN fact again we see WHEN a church was simply ALLOWING a false one to teach and to seduce
HE rebuked it sharply . This is why i wish people would get back into the bible . NOT so i can be justified
BUT SO they can see for themselves what i have by grace learned myself ,
And that is , OH DEAR they been duping the heck out of us all . and their methods ALLOW LEAVEN to remain
and leaven remaining MEANS LEAVEN taking over . OH yeah its correction time all right .
But no worries i wont be walking into churches with WHIPS , But i will be correcting bad docrtrine .
IF we think JESUS picking up whips was harsh , WHAT DO YOU THINK
IS going to come upon them ON HIS DAY when THE FULL WRATH OF GOD COMETH DOWN upon them all .
And i know i dont desire their death or destruction , NOR DID GOD . but its why
HE warned , its why the SON warned , its why the apostels warned . OH yeah , its correction time in the house all right .

 

[Grailhunter]

chief , i heard your solution . two errors . one was instruction to PUNCH someone . THEN go ahead and go to the wedding .
BOTH accounts , DEAD wrong . I suggest we return to the bible and fast for to learn .

Violence is a topic that is misunderstood.
In the Old Testament Yahweh's rules of war where kill all the males adults and children and keep the virgins for yourselves.
In the New Testament Yeshua got violent when he needed to.
And Ya I have smacked a few.....maybe save their life and their soul.

 

[PS95]

This is actually a complex and deep topic....and you are not going to like it, but religion is not about what we like and dislike. I have covered this topic extensively in college in more than one country.
Is seems easier to punch him in the nose and go to the wedding.
Wouldn't it be neat if we had a repentant meter on our forehead.
This topic is not well defined in the scriptures, which leaves questions and maybe not be enough to condemn someone. Particularly since that sin, is between him and Yeshua.

Somethings that Paul said people debate....in Corinthians Chapter 7 Paul said simply....Do not look for a wife.....is this a command. Chapter 7 looks to have commands and advise so we have to sort them out. In chapter 7 Paul advocates celibacy....Is that truly the better way. Celibate religions die out.

I will say this overall, a lot of people do not take marriage and family important enough. And that is the over-riding thought I present here.

Debates and Questions
Again polygamy was never condemned or stopped in the scriptures, so the men could marry other women....Polygamy was common for centuries after the biblical era. Considering this a man only committed adultery if he had a one night stand. And in this case this man's intent was to marry.

Again I am going to remind you that in the Gospels----Yeshua---a Jew was talking to Jews about divorce in accordance with the Mosaic Law. These Jews could have several wives and Yeshua was essentially telling them, if they divorce one of their wives for any other reason than adultery they cannot marry again, but that still meant that some of them had wives. And also His own apostles had issues with what He said about divorce.

Either way, Christianity did not adopt the Jewish letter of divorce. And although your Bible may have the word divorce appearing outside the four Gospels, it actually does not. Either way divorce or "put away" the rules for men are different than women....And it does appear to me to be unfair....But it is not based on what we like or dislike.

So as I read all this, if a woman leaves her husband for any other reason other than adultery she cannot remarry. But for men if polygamy is still biblically lawful then adultery only apply to one night stands and men are free to take multiple wives. (Keep in mind back in those days divorcing a woman was almost a death sentence and she did not take her children.)

The complication is of course is that these people in this storyline are not playing by these rules. Christianity changed all this and by the middle ages polygamy and concubinage was condemned.....But not scripturally. Even Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not. In this case, would it have been better for the man to take on a second wife than cause a divorce and a breakup of the family?

And as time went on Christianity add nearly 100 other sins that are not biblical. So this is all a debate.

There is still a lot to this that I have not brought up but I will say it again the marriage and the family are important.
Yeshua said....For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother 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.” Mark 10:8 and 9. This is God's intent and I agree. Now some people think this only applies to two people but God's Law...the Mosaic Law regulated polygamy.

Now what do I think, as I said I am a hard liner, I think not only should adultery carry prison time I think separations should be handled by a church. The civil process harms the adults and the children and causes a great deal of hate. But that is just a thought.

I do not like polygamy, but I agree with Martin Luther, I cannot condemn it. But I think it is better than divorce. As a whole, not a good practice but in some case a viable option. I know of a couple cases where it worked. Wife was paralyzed and even recommended her husband take a good friend of her's as a wife.

Then in the case of those couples living together......since biblically a ceremony is not required to be married....those together have not sinned but a lot of this applies to them too.

There is polygamy on the OT and there were also a lot of problems that came from it. While God didn't condemn it- He did warn it wasn't best- instructions for kings in Deut 17:17 warned: “He must not take many wives for himself, lest his heart go astray.”
Solomon’s polygamy played a huge role in his spiritual downfall. His foreign wives led him into idolatry.
When we read the accounts of polygamy- often times I've read of rivalry, strife, jealousy, etc because of it.
While we don't read it being forbidden by God- we also never see His endorsement. His silence is odd but we do see the outcomes...
The regulating that you mentioned don't address it but are only directed at fairness- ie- firstborn son..

When we read Genesis- one man one woman- one flesh.= God's design. Then we have some polygamy and coming to the NT we see NONE mentioned. It isn't forbidden, but it is not there. Common sense tells us it's not for the best.
Jesus reiterated Genesis-and flat out smacked down divorce with one exception. And that exception doesn't mean they can not try to reconcile. God still hates divorce.- Let no man put asunder.
Paul only wanted men of one wife to lead churches- You might read into that polygamy- but Paul also said it of widows having only one husband.
I am unaware of any women having concubines! I read them the same. One loyal marriage.
If a person can't be trusted in marriage - can they be trusted in lesser things?
The take away for all of the NT is that polygamy was frowned upon as not what God intended.

 

[Hillsage]

I was a part of the 2023 discussion where you first presented this testimony. I tagged you because I see the circumstances are analogous. If you disapprove of the relationship, will you reject the children produced by that relationship?

I would have to agree. And this is a bit of a GOD-incidence , that you tagged my 2 month old post "for such a time as this". We were on the way back from Mayo's on 3/27 and spent the night with my son and his wife in Topeka. Only to back track the next day to Kansas City, to go to the baby #1 dedication. I am referring to one of the two sperm donating homosexuals. And last year at Branson, it was a dedication that was supposed to have been for births of both homosexual's surrogates. Both babies, which were supposed to be born AFTER the homosexual couples wedding.....which still has not happened. This time, I did hug the masculine male fiance nephew who has been my 'family' by blood from birth. But the feminine male fiancee partner, only got a handshake this time....unlike last year at Branson. Why did I not hug him this time like I did last year???? It was because 'when I prayerfully asked' this time, I did NOT FEEL LED by the holy spirit of Christ in me, to hug him. And I will still leave any judgment of me for what I did, in the hands of He whom I am to be obeying. I already have my Great white throne judgment settled when my spirit was born again. But the BEMA/judgment seat of Christ, for what I may have 'heard right', or may have 'heard wrong' will only determine whether I missed or gained a reward in heaven, for trying to ACT like Jesus when He was on earth.
My last question; "Father in heaven....to send or not to send." The sunshine's smile, in on my face.

PS @Lambano your above URL doesn't go to my testimonial post. It goes to a "Can the moon influence human health". Might need to correct that.

 

[Grailhunter]

There is polygamy on the OT and there were also a lot of problems that came from it. While God didn't condemn it- He did warn it wasn't best- instructions for kings in Deut 17:17 warned: “He must not take many wives for himself, lest his heart go astray.”

Truth can be shocking.....
It goes beyond that.. The instructions to kings was because it was distracting and usually included idolatry and truces with Pagens. Things we do not have to worry about now a days. But as far as the culture, having a lot of wives and children was seen as a blessing of God.... Endorsement??? Yahweh took credit for King David's wives.

Then we have some polygamy and coming to the NT we see NONE mentioned. It isn't forbidden, but it is not there.

We see the effects of it. Paul had to stipulate that to be a church leader you had to be married and the husband of one wife. A belief that continues on in Judaism to this day. And most Protestant prefer their pastor to be married.

Common sense tells us it's not for the best.

This I agree with this completely.

I am unaware of any women having concubines! I read them the same. One loyal marriage.
If a person can't be trusted in marriage - can they be trusted in lesser things?
The take away for all of the NT is that polygamy was frowned upon as not what God intended.

There is nothing in the New Testament that frowns on polygamy. That is you superimposing your belief on the scriptures. On the other hand I wish polygamy was ended in the New Testament.
The explaination.....
In the Old Testament women were property. We would like to think that was not true in the New Testament but it is not true. Husbands paid the fathers for their daughter. And they were expected to deliver a virgin woman or the husband could kill her. That is one of the reasons mothers collected the sheet from the bridal chamber to prove her daughter's virginity. (Not all women bleed enough to stain the sheets.) Fathers controlled who their daughters married and that was not denounced by the Catholic Church until around the 13th century. And like I said even Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not.

The Jewish-Christians were more likely to have polygamous marriages but most of them were gone by the end of the 1st century.....

The Gentile-Christians that Paul brought in did not have the custom of polygamy or concubinage. And yes women were not ever allowed to have more than one husband or concubines.

 

[PS95]

Truth can be shocking.....
It goes beyond that.. The instructions to kings was because it was distracting and usually included idolatry and truces with Pagens. Things we do not have to worry about now a days. But as far as the culture, having a lot of wives and children was seen as a blessing of God.... Endorsement??? Yahweh took credit for King David's wives.




We see the effects of it. Paul had to stipulate that to be a church leader you had to be married and the husband of one wife. A belief that continues on in Judaism to this day. And most Protestant prefer their pastor to be married.

No- Paul wasn't married. It was not a rule that they had to be married. It was a rule If they were married-

This I agree with this completely.




There is nothing in the New Testament that frowns on polygamy. That is you superimposing your belief on the scriptures. On the other hand I wish polygamy was ended in the New Testament.

I don't agree! It is not condemned outright, as it is mentioned nowhere. It was not a common thing by then! Clearly it was no longer accepted. One man- one woman- don't divorce- be reconciled. no adultery- love your wife- respect your husband. No plurals anywhere.
I am not reading anything into it. I think saying polygamy is ok in the NT is reading into it.
Torturing someone with a screwdriver to the eye isn't spoken about but we know it's a bad idea..
1 Cor 7
"Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman." But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."-

I think it's clear what was taught and practiced.

The explaination.....
In the Old Testament women were property. We would like to think that was not true in the New Testament but it is not true. Husbands paid the fathers for their daughter. And they were expected to deliver a virgin woman or the husband could kill her. That is one of the reasons mothers collected the sheet from the bridal chamber to prove her daughter's virginity. (Not all women bleed enough to stain the sheets.) Fathers controlled who their daughters married and that was not denounced by the Catholic Church until around the 13th century. And like I said even Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not.

The Jewish-Christians were more likely to have polygamous marriages but most of them were gone by the end of the 1st century.....

What is the evidence for this statement? I have a feeling if it's accurate, that these MINOR # of Jews had to have already been polygamists times before they became Christians.

The Gentile-Christians that Paul brought in did not have the custom of polygamy or concubinage. And yes women were not ever allowed to have more than one husband or concubines.

What Luther said makes no nevermind to me. And yes, fathers arranged marriages- like I said in Italy they still did it in the 1920's. My grandmom was 17 yrs old and forced to marry a 37 yr old widower and was shipped to America. I don't think she ever forgave her dad for that. I don't know when that stopped.

How I see it is simple- if you want a great spouse- PRAY about it.
I had been widowed at a young age. I prayed for a new mate-
He answered me big time. We met a week later and were married in 6 mos. I could not have asked for a better person to be married to and it's been over 30 yrs.
I think we are afraid to pray about it because we fear God will send us some dorky weirdo.. NOPE! He exceeded my expectations in every way. I wish that young people understood this!!
We don't always choose right.. but God knows exactly what we need.

 

[Jay Ross]

Hello, Did God reject King David, and not honour the birth of David's son, Solomon, who was conceived during an adulterous activity.

 

[Jesussaves150]

According to the biblical narrative in 2 Samuel, Solomon was not the child conceived during the initial adultery between King David and Bathsheba.Solomon was the second son born to David and Bathsheba, born after they were married and after David was forgiven by God.

 

[Armour of God]

Ok, so if a child molester and a pimp were getting married.

Again your talking about something totally different. It would depend on the things that I mentioned

Seeing were asking other questions, would you go to a wedding if the couple were Muslims?

 

[Armour of God]

men gonna think as men gonna think . as for me i prefer to KNOW , and by know i mean the holy scriptures .
now if we read them often and daily you gonna see exactly how they were .
How and what instruction they gave to the church concerning correction and etc .
If any beleiver be a fornicator , an idoaltor , yes adulterer or etc
DO NOT even eat with such a one . SO going to their weddings of sin , NOT to be DONE .
UNLESS of course one desires to stand and say , YES i have a just cause for WHY they ought not to be married .
NOW IF one is led to do so , THEN GO and do so . DONT let me stop anyone from that .
BUT if we do , ITS WHAT WE MUST DO .
And i dont think JESUS worried about hiS F IRST encounters causing division either .
IN fact JESUS told them this . WHEN his own apostels told him , DONT you know you offended them .
JESUS did not say , OH DEAR , we need to sew up and patch up the relationship , we sure dont want them
being fractured .
HE told his own , LEAVE THEM ALONE . Every plant that MY FATHER has not planted SHALL be rooted up .
We are gonna find out , the more we read ABOUT JESUS , and later in acts , then later in the letters
and even in revelation . GOD AINT , JESUS AINT at all the way most think he is .
Nor were the apostels . THERE was not judge not correct not mentality .
IN fact again we see WHEN a church was simply ALLOWING a false one to teach and to seduce
HE rebuked it sharply . This is why i wish people would get back into the bible . NOT so i can be justified
BUT SO they can see for themselves what i have by grace learned myself ,
And that is , OH DEAR they been duping the heck out of us all . and their methods ALLOW LEAVEN to remain
and leaven remaining MEANS LEAVEN taking over . OH yeah its correction time all right .
But no worries i wont be walking into churches with WHIPS , But i will be correcting bad docrtrine .
IF we think JESUS picking up whips was harsh , WHAT DO YOU THINK
IS going to come upon them ON HIS DAY when THE FULL WRATH OF GOD COMETH DOWN upon them all .
And i know i dont desire their death or destruction , NOR DID GOD . but its why
HE warned , its why the SON warned , its why the apostels warned . OH yeah , its correction time in the house all right .

Well we all have our opinions.
For me there isn't enough information in this case to make a final decision.

 

[Grailhunter]

No- Paul wasn't married. It was not a rule that they had to be married. It was a rule If they were married-

You are right Paul was not married, nor was he an overseer of one church.
An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, skillful in teaching, 1st timothy 3:2 It does not say single or the husband of one wife and since we do not have example of overseers being single I still think it was at least a possibility that they preferred the overseer to be married. Another reason I believe this is true is that these people were homophobic, they did not want a queer overseeing a church. But on the other hand there is not enough information to nail this down.

I don't agree! It is not condemned outright, as it is mentioned nowhere. It was not a common thing by then! Clearly it was no longer accepted. One man- one woman- don't divorce- be reconciled. no adultery- love your wife- respect your husband. No plurals anywhere.
I am not reading anything into it. I think saying polygamy is ok in the NT is reading into it.
Torturing someone with a screwdriver to the eye isn't spoken about but we know it's a bad idea..
1 Cor 7
"Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: "It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman." But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control."-

It is a very simple thing and a very big thing....if polygamy.....having multiple wives was a sin or problem there would have been a discussion of not having multiple wives in the scriptures. And history shows that polygamy continued in Christianity and it still continues in Christianity today. Definitely not a common practice in mainstream Christianity and you and I both do not like polygamy but the difference between you and me is that I do not superimpose my beliefs on the scriptures. Polygamy continued in Christianity after the biblical period and this is documented and like I have said in the 16th century Martin Luther said he could not condemn polygamy because the scriptures did not. And even the Catholic priests were taking concubines because the church would not let them marry. But there is more to that story.

What is the evidence for this statement? I have a feeling if it's accurate, that these MINOR # of Jews had to have already been polygamists times before they became Christians.

We can go over this.....evidence of what exactly?

What Luther said makes no nevermind to me.

So nothing that anybody ever said means anything? LOL Martin Luther was the founder of Protestantism? What are you? Biblical scholars note that polygamy was not stopped in the scriptures. What he said was a public statement and no one disagreed with him. And the point I am making is that there were written conversations happening in history that showed it was still going on.

How I see it is simple- if you want a great spouse- PRAY about it.
I had been widowed at a young age. I prayed for a new mate-
He answered me big time. We met a week later and were married in 6 mos. I could not have asked for a better person to be married to and it's been over 30 yrs.
I think we are afraid to pray about it because we fear God will send us some dorky weirdo.. NOPE! He exceeded my expectations in every way. I wish that young people understood this!!
We don't always choose right.. but God knows exactly what we need.

I am happy for you and I agree about praying for a spouse.

 

[Jay Ross]

According to the biblical narrative in 2 Samuel, Solomon was not the child conceived during the initial adultery between King David and Bathsheba.Solomon was the second son born to David and Bathsheba, born after they were married and after David was forgiven by God.

You need to read 1 Chronicles 3:1-6: -

The Family of David​

(Matt 1:6)​

​

3:1 Now these were the sons of David who were born to him in Hebron: The firstborn was Amnon, by Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; the second, Daniel, by Abigail the Carmelitess; 2 the third, Absalom the son of Maacah, the daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur; the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith; 3 the fifth, Shephatiah, by Abital; the sixth, Ithream, by his wife Eglah.​

​

4 These six were born to him in Hebron. There he reigned seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years. 5 And these were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon — four by Bathshua the daughter of Ammiel. 6 Also there were Ibhar, Elishama, Eliphelet, 7 Nogah, Nepheg, Japhia, 8 Elishama, Eliada, and Eliphelet — nine in all. 9 These were all the sons of David, besides the sons of the concubines, and Tamar their sister.​

Please note that Solomon was the fourth child born to Bathshua and King David and that Solomon was conceived when King David went into Bathshua to console her because of the death of Shimea her first son with King David.

But this is getting off topic.

 

[amigo de christo]

You need to read 1 Chronicles 3:1-6: -

​

The Family of David

​

(Matt 1:6)​

​

​

3:1 Now these were the sons of David who were born to him in Hebron: The firstborn was Amnon, by Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; the second, Daniel, by Abigail the Carmelitess; 2 the third, Absalom the son of Maacah, the daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur; the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith; 3 the fifth, Shephatiah, by Abital; the sixth, Ithream, by his wife Eglah.​

​

4 These six were born to him in Hebron. There he reigned seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years. 5 And these were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon — four by Bathshua the daughter of Ammiel. 6 Also there were Ibhar, Elishama, Eliphelet, 7 Nogah, Nepheg, Japhia, 8 Elishama, Eliada, and Eliphelet — nine in all. 9 These were all the sons of David, besides the sons of the concubines, and Tamar their sister.​

Please note that Solomon was the fourth child born to Bathshua and King David and that Solomon was conceived when King David went into Bathshua to console her because of the death of Shimea her first son with King David.

But this is getting off topic.

People need to know something . To put away a wife was forbidden by law lest for fornication etc
They could have more than one wife but could not put a wife away for just any cause .
he who does so by law and BY JESUS HIMSELF and remarries another is comitting adultery .
Tis why paul would say if she be married to another man while her husband lives , she will be called
an adulteress . He didnt say oh if she says im sorry but goes head and remarries that it is okay .
NO remarriage can be done . Only two causes , fornication or death .

 

[Dan Clarkston]

Again your talking about something totally different. It would depend on the things that I mentioned

Seeing were asking other questions, would you go to a wedding if the couple were Muslims?

Christians should not be attending weddings of anybody living in sin including those marrying in to adultery, and especially not moslems as they are servants of the devil.

For me there isn't enough information in this case to make a final decision.

Yeah,not knowing God's Word ore otherwise not being led of the Lord leaves people indecisive

 

[Armour of God]

Christians should not be attending weddings of anybody living in sin including those marrying in to adultery, and especially not moslems as they are servants of the devil

That's just silly. I know plenty of Muslims and they are good people. Ive been to a Muslim wedding. To say their all servants of the devil is very uneducated. There are good and bad people in all races and religions

 

[Armour of God]

Changed my vote back to "yes" after realizing how arrogant, hateful and prideful the "no" crowd really are.

Pride is Satans favourite sin, he pulls you away from God, your friends and your family

 

[Dan Clarkston]

That's just silly. I know plenty of Muslims and they are good people. Ive been to a Muslim wedding. To say their all servants of the devil is very uneducated. There are good and bad people in all races and religions

2 Corinthians 6:14
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

2 Corinthians 6:17
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

Just because a person is seemingly nice and polite does not mean they are in right standing with the Lord.
Your "education" comes from demons and is in opposition to the Word of the Lord.

Maybe some day you will come out from among them so you can be accepted by the Lord.