Yet ANOTHER dead horse beating

[pastorables]

What I have yet to see is any NT that actually permits remarriage while one's spouse lives.

I notice that you are being strict about keeping this subject within the NT only (which may not be all bad), however, I wonder if you do the same thing with tithing?

Love ya brother,
pa

[Poimen]

What I have yet to see is any NT that actually permits remarriage while one's spouse lives.

I notice that you are being strict about keeping this subject within the NT only (which may not be all bad), however, I wonder if you do the same thing with tithing?

Love ya brother,
pa

I do, actually.

[Shellie]

Paul, you said exactly what I was getting ready to post, but you beat me to it. I was going to say then that the gentiles are just a mistress.

Now, Poimen, you said:

Now, to attempt to answer-- no.
It makes us the bride of Christ. Israel is the wife of God (the Father).

WHAT?!?!?!?!?! So who is the Holy Spirit going to marry?

Father and Son double wedding?

Will Heaven be segregated? One home for God's wife and one home for Christ's bride? On the left side of town live the Jews....on the right live the Gentiles?

So technically, the Jews would be the Gentiles mother in law?

What about there is no Jew or Gentile in Christ.....................

Me thinketh that in an attempt to answer, thou didest not thinketh.

[soulsearcher]

Shellie, bless your heart, sis. Apparently you didn't know that we (those who are not members of The Church, whichever it is now...TCOG, COG, COGOP, I can't keep up with all of them) will all be guests in heaven, continually serving the Bride/Church.

[Shellie]

soulsearcher wrote:

Apparently you didn't know that we (those who are not members of The Church, whichever it is now...TCOG, COG, COGOP, I can't keep up with all of them) will all be guests in heaven, continually serving the Bride/Church.

No, I knew that.

I just didn't think Poimen held to that belief anymore if ever.

I believe he left the TCOG. WAIT!! Would this mean that Poimen separated from the Bride....and rejoined himself to another........Oh, I'm so confused.

[Pastorbps]

Once Jesus spoke on the subject of marriage, He was forever changing any OT allowances. It is absolutely evident He made a change. For instance, He said, "Whoever marries her that is put away commits adultery." That wasn't what the OT law taught. The OT taught the woman was free to remarry. Jesus said it was adultery. It seems clear His teaching did away with the old to install the new. Why is it we understand this concept when it comes to concubines, polygamy, and a number of other things but we don't understand it about D&R? We don't say people can have concubines today but they had them in the OT. We would tell anyone who tried to support having a concubine,"Well, that doesn't apply to us today." At the same time, these same people refuse to accept the same argument from those who say the same thing about D&R. This is especially troubling when Jesus clearly spoke about D&R but he didn't mention anything about taking concubines. People say, "The teachings on concubines has changed without NT reference while saying the OT passages still apply in regards to D&R when Jesus did talk about it. I don't understand it.

[scooter]

Does anyone know the average wing span of a yellow belly sap sucker?

[Pastor Bill]

Does anyone know the average wing span of a yellow belly sap sucker?

13-16 inches

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/AllAboutBirds/BirdGuide/Yellow-bellied_Sapsucker_dtl.html

[Shellie]

scooter wrote:

Does anyone know the average wing span of a yellow belly sap sucker?

Which reminds me....What type of rare butterfly was that guy trying to catch while he was on Gilligan's Island? My memory is slowly deteriorating.

[RamboPreacher]

Once Jesus spoke on the subject of marriage, He was forever changing any OT allowances. It is absolutely evident He made a change. For instance, He said, "Whoever marries her that is put away commits adultery." ....

already posted on this exact issue.

...Put away, vs. writing of divorcement:
The words/phraseology is different in the original language.
What did a man do in those days with a wife that “finds no favor in his eyes”? He put her away. He Hebrew word is shalach; It is different than the word for divorce (keriythuwth). This (shalach) is more than just a “separation”, but more like a half-divorce. And was sometimes referred to as and translated as “divorce”.

A tradition developed that a man merely said “I divorce you” and that divorce was not contestable at the time; but it was NOT a legal divorce for the woman/wife! This was the cruel and hard-hearted tradition that made Deuteronomy 24 a necessity (as Jesus mentions).

This (patriarchic) hardness of the heart/tradition happened in the time of Moses, happened in the time of Jesus (and Josephus) and even “today”. In American Orthodox Judaism, there is a situation where a man will “shalach” his (ex?)wife. But will not grant a religious bill or writing of divorcement (called a “get”).

The woman is in a state of limbo and neither married, nor unmarried. Since only the man can grant a get, the woman has/had no authority and is stuck. Since he refuses to grant the get, the marriage is ended civilly, but is still binding religiously.

These men (in America!) put away their wives, through misuse of civil law, and retain power over them by ignoring religious law provided to provide women freedom when put away by hard-hearted husmands/men.
Malachi says that God hated this putting away practice.

Malachi 2:6: “For I hate divorce,”(shalach, NOT keriythuwth) says the Lord, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong,” says the Lord of hosts. “So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.”

For more complete context of how Malachi responds to the leaders that ask how they dealt treacherously – Malachi 2:14-16: 14 “Yet you say, ‘For what reason?’ Because the Lord has been a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. 15 “But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring? Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of your youth. 16 “For I hate divorce,” says the Lord, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong,” says the Lord of hosts. “So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.”

This tradition and practice was not only cruel, it was adulterous and was not true, full divorce for BOTH parties, the man and the woman.

In Josephus writings the Antiquities of the Jews writes that this practice was commonplace. Not necessarily considered polygamy, but the “next best thing” to it (Antiquities 12.187, 187, etc…) There is mention of putting away the wife by a man named Joseph, Ptolemy’s tax representative).

This shalach practice/tradition is one extreme is abandonment (put away and put out), and on the other side could be or lead into polygamy (put away, and kept).

[MrDanger]

Shellie, bless your heart, sis. Apparently you didn't know that we (those who are not members of The Church, whichever it is now...TCOG, COG, COGOP, I can't keep up with all of them) will all be guests in heaven, continually serving the Bride/Church.

By the Mike, when we get to heaven, I like my tea sweet. Thanks. I know you will do a good job.

[Shellie]

Mr. Danger wrote:

By the Mike, when we get to heaven, I like my tea sweet. Thanks. I know you will do a good job

Soulsearcher, please feel free to simultaneously shove a lemon wedge up Jeff's nose at the same time you are serving him tea. I'm pretty sure that once you get to heaven, you can't get kicked out.

[Paully_44]

By the Mike, when we get to heaven, I like my tea sweet.

Eewwwww, that is a whole nother topic.... sweet vs unsweetened.

[scooter]

Lord help me to love Pually despite his yankivity.

[Paully_44]

Lord help me to love Pually despite his yankivity.

I was amazed at the GA in 06. we went to eat at an Italian restaurant. I ordeded my tea (unsweetened) and the waitress brought me a small container of syrup, just in case I wanted to add some to my tea. Not sugar or artificial sweetener, just some clear syrup. Always learnin' something new, I am.