This is God's Law??? Subscribe   
  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 2:07 am  
To:  ALL   (1 of 87)  
 
  238.1  
 
Hi, this comes from Deuteronomy 25:5 
If brothers are living together and one of them dies without a son, his widow must not marry outside the family. Her husband's brother shall take her and marry her and fulfill the duty of a brother-in-law to her.>> 

Am I to believe that people to take the Bible literally actually follow this nonsense? 
Am I missing soemthing here? Thanks, Dave 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/24/2001 7:59 am  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (2 of 87)  
 
  238.2 in reply to 238.1  
 
Dave you are missing something!

 

The Laws in Deuteronomy are given to govern the Nation of Israel.

Israel actually means Governed by God.

 

After God brought the nation of Israel out of Egypt He gave them the land Promised to their Fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In giving the land God gave it in sections to each family group. Israel was divided into 12 sections or states and each state belonged to each original family/tribe.

 

God kept the families separate and distinct because the Messiah was to come from one specific family the family of Judah.

 

What you have commented on (rather rudely) is Gods desire to support continue and look after the family lines.

 

God is the God of life and He desires life. If a husband dies God desires a person from the same family to have a baby with that woman giving life where death was. God desires a bride to always be a part of the family and not to be removed or rejected because of death.

 

I hope you do not desire other practices such as the Hindu practice of burring alive the widow at the funeral of her deceased husband.

 

These laws are how God governs Israel. Now that the Messiah/Jesus has come and is known to be from the Family of Judah it has not been necessary to keep the strict family divisions in Israel. Today it would probably not be possible for a Jew today to prove that Judah is their particular ancestor giving even more reason to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah promised to come from the Jewish family of Judah. The same family King David came from.





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


Message 3 of 87 was Deleted    



  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 10:35 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (4 of 87)  
 
  238.4 in reply to 238.2  
 
David, 
<God is the God of life and He desires life. If a husband dies God desires a person from the same family to have a baby with that woman giving life where death was. God desires a bride to always be a part of the family and not to be removed or rejected because of death.> 

I see. This also comes from the same chapter and I was wondering if you find this law from God a wee bit strong: 

11 
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 
12 
you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.>> 

That seems a bit severe from a loving God, but maybe that's just my take on it. 

All the best, Dave 





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 10/24/01 1:55:22 PM ET by DAVEHORNE711 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/24/2001 11:11 am  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (5 of 87)  
 
  238.5 in reply to 238.4  
 
Dave,

 

If you Feel the need to be the Judge of God and to condemn His words and His actions that is up to you.

 

God does not want people and families fighting with one another. To do these things is to Kill the Soul. To loose a hand and keep your soul is a better solution.

 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 11:25 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (6 of 87)  
 
  238.6 in reply to 238.5  
 
David, 
<To loose a hand and keep your soul is a better solution.> 

You know, when I read those Law's of God in Deuteronomy, it struck me that it seemed so improbable that an all knowing, an omnipresent Being would come up with laws like that; it seemed so much like laws a human being would create. 

I also realize that if you question _anything_ in the Bible (whatever version you have), you can start questioning this and then questioning that and before you you know it, you might just have some doubts, but I know that won't happen. You believe _everything_ - the things that don't make sense to a reasonable being, you accept. 

That is the underlying problem when religions clash - everyone has the onlt true interpretation. As I've said before, there is only one true belief and that is the belief of the person to whom you are currently speaking. 

All the best, Dave ... incidentally, the crosses you have as your signature, I believe are not accurate. The crosses back them used by the Romans were more like a capital 'T'; of course, I could be wrong. DH 





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 10/24/2001 2:28:56 PM ET by DAVEHORNE711 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/24/2001 11:32 am  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (7 of 87)  
 
  238.7 in reply to 238.6  
 
Dave,

 

The Resurrection of Jesus is that how man thinks or is that how God thinks and does?

 

The Cross where God died for the Sins of the world is that how man thinks or is that how God thinks and does?

 

Creation, color, light, sound, taste touch, feel, smell, laughter, love, happiness, commitment, is this how man thinks or is this how God thinks, does and creates?





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 11:32 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (8 of 87)  
 
  238.8 in reply to 238.5  
 
David, 
I wrote, "That seems a bit severe from a loving God, but maybe that's just my take on it." 

... and you responded, "If you Feel the need to be the Judge of God and to condemn His words and His actions that is up to you." 

Where did I condemn His words? I merely stated that it "seems a bit severe". Doesn't it seem severe to you, don't you have an opinion? 

You do what a lot of people do in forums - you take what a person clearly writes and then run with it and assume your response is accurate; it is not. Please, in the future to keep discussions accurate, it is better to actually quote the person _with_ quotation marks; it keeps the discourse honest. 

All the best, Dave 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 11:40 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (9 of 87)  
 
  238.9 in reply to 238.7  
 
David, would you be so kind to respond to 238.6 (I believe - two messages back) and quote me with quotation marks and respond to what I wrote. 
I read your response and was wondering exactly what you are replying to. I can not follow your train of thought. 

Sincerely, Dave
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/24/2001 11:47 am  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (10 of 87)  
 
  238.10 in reply to 238.9  
 
Dave,

 

You cant follow my train of thought because your only desire is to Criticize God and the people who follow him.

 

And yes, you do Constantly criticize and Judge!





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 12:04 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (11 of 87)  
 
  238.11 in reply to 238.10  
 
David, I'm going to say this again - the discourse will stay honest if everyone quotes the other and replies to that. When you speaking saying what God thinks or believes, you're really just using your own words ... or what you think God might think. 
It's really more accurate to quote the individual and respond to that. 

I, of course, am only speaking for myself. If there is a God (or god or Gods or gods), I don't know for a fact, but I can accurately speak for myself and present an honest discourse. You do not have to agree, of course, with my view of the universe, but try, just once, to quote someone and respond to that quote; try it, please. 

You wrote, "You cant follow my train of thought because your only desire is to Criticize God and the people who follow him." 

That's not true. Some of my best friends believe in a God. I thought the purpose of a forum was to exchange ideas, not just to 'hang out' with like minded people. I would think as the moderator of this forum, you would welcome people who may question some of the writing in the Bible that seems, well, possibly questionable. 

If you repspond to this, please quote me and respond to my quote. You do not know my thoughts, only what I write. 

All the best, Dave 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 10/24/2001 3:08:03 PM ET by DAVEHORNE711 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/24/2001 12:26 pm  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (12 of 87)  
 
  238.12 in reply to 238.11  
 
Dave,

 

Still you have done nothing but Criticize and I have to add to it constant Complaining.

 

Thank you for the suggestion to include Quotes from you in my replies, but I have decided to allow myself the freedom to respond in my own individual way. If I do not conform to your standards and to your ways then please allow me the freedom to be an individual.

 

Besides I try to mostly use the Bible as a quotable resource.

 

You and others who do use the quote a person method still routinely misrepresent what was said, but I guess that following certain man-made rules and protocols makes you feel more Righteous and Superior to others.





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 12:42 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (13 of 87)  
 
  238.13 in reply to 238.12  
 
David, 
<Still you have done nothing but Criticize and I have to add to it constant Complaining> 

David, that's not true. I just wrote (in this forum) to BROMD asking for the specific issue of Time magazine where some interesting statistics were mentioned. That's one example of a perfectly tame message - no complaining or criticizism in that message, just a simple question. 

<Thank you for the suggestion to include Quotes from you in my replies, but I have decided to allow myself the freedom to respond in my own individual way. If I do not conform to your standards and to your ways then please allow me the freedom to be an individual.> 

David, we are all individuals and stating that really states nothing since it applies to everyone. Something that applies to everyone, applies to no one - do you follow? 

<You and others who do use the quote a person method still routinely misrepresent what was said, but I guess that following certain man-made rules and protocols makes you feel more Righteous and Superior to others.> 

___If I feel that I am superior___, it is only because I make a concerted effort to be accurate. Do not assume anything about me other than what you see in print, period. 

I prefer to respond when I am quoted; if that is beyond your capacity (as an individual), so be it. 

All the best, Dave Horne 


 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/24/2001 12:51 pm  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (14 of 87)  
 
  238.14 in reply to 238.13  
 
Dave to be accurate, 

 

You deleted your first post to Bromd because even to a fellow non-believer it was full of criticism as you came across doubting her source.

 

Then you reposted a very short posting.

 

Just trying to keep things accurate for you!





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/24/2001 1:27 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (15 of 87)  
 
  238.15 in reply to 238.14  
 
David, this is the chain of events - 
I wrote my first letter to BROMD asking for the specific issue of Time where those less than flattering statistics of Christians appeared. I went back and did not see that message. I wrongly thought that you had deleted it. I initially thought you had deleted it because I included a web address for Time magazine - a web address here in this forum got a message of mine removed in the past. 

I then wrongly thought that you may have removed that first message because I didn't question the statistics which, of course, might offend some Christians. 

I wrote a second letter because I did not see that first letter and thought you may have removed it. When I saw both letters, I realized there may have been a problem with those letters getting shown and I deleted both and wrote yet a third where I asked for the specific issue in a completely unbiased fashion - I just asked for the specific issue of Time magazine, period. 

Now, you wrote, 'You deleted your first post to Bromd because even to a fellow non-believer it was full of criticism as you came across doubting her source. 
Then you reposted a very short posting.' 

David, you see how you misinterpeted this! By asking for the issue of Time I am doubting no one; I just wanted to see the article for myself, period. I deleted that first message (after wrinting a second message) because I wrongly thought you had removed it, first, because it contained a web address and then second, because my _not_ doubting the statistics could come across as offensive to Christians. 

I erred on the side of being polite not being critical. 

I do endevour to be accurate. All the best, Dave ....whew!
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/24/2001 1:36 pm  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (16 of 87)  
 
  238.16 in reply to 238.15  
 
Ok

 

You did a valiant job of straightening that out.

 





David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  bromd   10/25/2001 7:05 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (17 of 87)  
 
  238.17 in reply to 238.14  
 
Um... Just because I was mentioned in this post, please allow me to correct you on one *teenie* thing: I'm a he. =) 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   10/26/2001 8:51 am  
To:  bromd   (18 of 87)  
 
  238.18 in reply to 238.17  
 
BROMD, you mentioned that you're a 'he', but you have your gender as 'f' in your profile. I thought you might want to be informed about that. That was probably why I referred to you as 'she'. All the best, Dave 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  bromd   10/26/2001 7:37 pm  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (19 of 87)  
 
  238.19 in reply to 238.18  
 
Hrmmmmmm... 
Oops, I didn't even notice until now. I must have changed it on accident when I removed most of my profile info. 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 10/26/01 10:41:31 PM ET by BROMD 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  WannaFly1   11/14/2001 8:44 am  
To:  bromd unread  (20 of 87)  
 
  238.20 in reply to 238.19  
 
How about this one. Who gave the law about divorce that Jesus revoked. Cause Jesus said Moses did, and Moses said God did. Now if God did, then that means God is partial to times people culture etc., and not always righteous and just. If Moses did, then that means that the Bible is not totally inspired. How does one explain this? BTW this part here is an edit. I did something wrong when I posted this, it wasn't directed necessarily at BROMD. Anyone with a sensible answer to this is appreciated. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 11/14/01 12:37:58 PM ET by WANNAFLY1 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  David (DavidABrown)    11/14/2001 10:22 am  
To:  WannaFly1   (21 of 87)  
 
  238.21 in reply to 238.20  
 
The Bible says that God gave the original Law not to get Divorced. The Bible-Jesus also says that God gave the new Law through Moses Because of the Hardness of peoples heart but that God has always intended for Marriage to be to one person and to be lasting.

 

Mark 10:2-9

And the Pharisees came to Him (Jesus), and asked Him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting (testing) Him. And He answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? and they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement and to put her away. 

And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the Hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the Creation, God made them Male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; and they twain (two) shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh {in their children}. What therefore God hath joined together let not man put asunder.

 

So in a sense God was giving some people what they wanted divorce. Divorce is Not what God wants. If you are ever Unfortunate enough to go through a divorce or to have parents or other family members get divorced then I think you would agree with God that divorce, the Death of a Relationship, is a Terrible event!

 

I gather from you postings that Nothing God does will please you. It looks like you want to condemn God for not wanting divorce and you want to condemn God for allowing something that He doesnt agree with.

 

Marriage is a picture of a relationship between God and people, it is to be intimate, loving, permanent and lasting.

 

Hope you can enter into a lasting relationship with God!



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  123four   11/14/2001 8:42 pm  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (22 of 87)  
 
  238.22 in reply to 238.1  
 
Dear God, I would hope that never happened 
to me. lol lol. As Christians we are in 
the New Covenant and we have 2 commandments. 
Very simplified. 1. love God with all of 
our beings. 2. love our neighbor as ourselves. 
Still all things considered, and the true' 
meaning, these are strong commandments. 
We are under the Covenant of Grace and we 
live in liberty instead of bondage to the 
laws of the Old Testament. We are cautioned 
against trying to work our way to God or 
to heaven, but rather to know in our hearts 
that God did all FOR us, and that we could 
not ever become 'good enough' , but rather 
because HE is good, and has provided all 
for us, and if we accept that provision, 
then He accepts us and we become born 
again, and a part of the family of God. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/12/2002 4:23 pm  
To:  Dave Horne (DaveHorne711)   (23 of 87)  
 
  238.23 in reply to 238.6  
 
It may help to remember that Moses made some laws that God didn't endorse; such as Divorce! So, factually, we cannot be sure that all these laws were of God!
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/12/2002 4:40 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (24 of 87)  
 
  238.24 in reply to 238.21  
 
<<<And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the Hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.>>> 
The "he" Jesus refers to in this part of the verse is Moses, not God! Moses wrote it because of the hardness of their hearts! God had nothing to do with it! I know you probably aren't looking at the statement you made about God having Moses do it logically, because if you were you would realize that makes God a liar! Yes, you can divorce, but no you can't! The way you explain it God had Moses lie to the people to satisfy the people! God is not a liar, and He is also not one to compromise with that which is unGodly! I have also seen you in a pretty Christian light since I have been here, but after reading the past posts here; you exuded a very unChristian attitude in not answering Dave's questions and accusing him of criticism and judgement of God; when in fact you were guilty of the same criticism and judgement of Dave! This is part of the reason I left "Adult Christian Forum"! People were becoming guilty of the same things they were accusing others!

May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/12/2002 5:29 pm  
To:  ALL   (25 of 87)  
 
  238.25 in reply to 238.24  
 
I disagree that Moses and God were somehow at different purposes. Jesus was asked a question at a time when a great debate was happening about what constituted 'uncleanness' in a women and allowed for a divorce...two sides..one taking an easy road, the other a hard one (from the man's perspective). One can refer to rabbi Hillel and Shammai for more info. but that background is crucial. 
Jesus takes the people back to BEFORE the Mosaic law..Adam and Eve. We know God hates divorce (malachi 2). and Jesus seeks to show us God's view and then (wiht his comments on adultery) reinforces the stricter rule against divorce. 

In the Mosaic law, God gave the Jews laws to live by as a nation under a theocracy..allowing for divorce. Much like he told them to kill women and children when they took the promised land...but of course that does not mean that the USA or any other nation seeking to follow God's Word should do the same during war. 

It was a specific instruction for a specific time. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/12/2002 5:37 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (26 of 87)  
 
  238.26 in reply to 238.25  
 
Then you believe the verse stating God does not change is a lie! He either does not lie or He does! Why would God have to submit to allowance of divorce? Because the people wanted it! Please show any scripture that says God gave the people something unGodly, because they asked for it! What possible Godly purpose could divorce serve? To say this, is to say that God changes, but only when He decides, and again the verse of His never changing and not being a liar is null and void!
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  karen (karen10051)   1/12/2002 6:26 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (27 of 87)  
 
  238.27 in reply to 238.24  
 
Are you saying there is no Godly reason for divorce? 
karen

<#### src="http://www.geocities.com/prisca107/karen.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="230" height="210">  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/12/2002 8:25 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (28 of 87)  
 
  238.28 in reply to 238.26  
 
Then you believe the verse stating God does not change is a lie! He either does not lie or He does! Why would God have to submit to allowance of divorce? Because the people wanted it! Please show any scripture that says God gave the people something unGodly, because they asked for it! What possible Godly purpose could divorce serve? To say this, is to say that God changes, but only when He decides, and again the verse of His never changing and not being a liar is null and void! 
___________________________________________________________________ 
You seem very quick to assume the worst in my post...with your first comments about God telling lies etc. 
I suggest you re-read my post. Jesus allowed for divorce. In very rare cases..putting him on the stricter side (Shammai) than the liberal Hillel side of the argument in His day. Please read the NT passage and the specific questions asked of Jesus about divorce (noting again it was like so many of their questions, a desire to divide his popularity or get him to speak against Moses).. 

What possible Godly purpose could divorce serve you ask? Well, how about the man who commits adultery with a whore and contacts AIDS. Would you condemn the innocent wife to stay married and have sexual relations with this man..or allow for the divorce. Jesus allowed for the divorce. 

How about the man who sexually abuses his daughter. God allows the wife to divorce for the good of her, the daughter and the family...and hopefully the man will repent and get right with the Lord as well. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  karen (karen10051)   1/13/2002 5:56 am  
To:  StevenJn316 unread  (29 of 87)  
 
  238.29 in reply to 238.28  
 
Hi Steven, 
What i find kind of interesting, is that Mrs. Penitant (his wife) stated in another post on another thread "My first husband used to phisically and verbally abuse me so I've been in that situation before."...indicating that she had been previously married and divorced because of abuse..Which I think is absolutely right and good in the eyes of God. But funny he should have such standards against divorce at all costs.... 

karen

<#### src="http://www.geocities.com/prisca107/karen.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="230" height="210">  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/13/2002 4:28 pm  
To:  karen (karen10051)   (30 of 87)  
 
  238.30 in reply to 238.27  
 
There are two reasons. The first: If you come to God, and your spouse doesn't; then you can divorce if the unbelieving spouse agrees! But if the unbelieving spouse wants to stay, you cannot! The second: Adultery! You have the option here, but even then, God says it is better to forgive then divorce!
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/13/2002 4:39 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (31 of 87)  
 
  238.31 in reply to 238.28  
 
...(Shammai) than the liberal Hillel... 
Theological teachings of these two had nothing to do with it. This was strictly Moses idea. God gave him divorce for adultery! Moses added the divorce for convenience! Even Jesus admits that Moses was responsible the convenience command, not the Father! 

God hates divorce, but it was and is allowable for Adultery! That would cover your last two questions! Yes if he cheats with anyone, she has the option to divorce him. Adultery is sexual involvement with anyone other than your wife! That would include daughters and sons or whores with AIDS! 

May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/13/2002 4:40 pm  
To:  karen (karen10051)   (32 of 87)  
 
  238.32 in reply to 238.29  
 
My wifes first husband died! There was no divorce!
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    1/13/2002 6:44 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (33 of 87)  
 
  238.33 in reply to 238.28  
 
Hi Steven,

 

I think we are on agreement on this.

 

I think this verse would indicate that God has His standards and that God will allow man to have mans standards yet the Blessings are with God.

 

Psalm 106:13-15 They soon forgot his works; they waited not for his counsel: But lusted exceedingly in the wilderness, and tempted God in the desert. And He gave them their request; but sent leanness into their soul.

 

Divorce is something that God has never wanted mankind to experience. Divorce is something that man desires and it is a certain Leanness of the Soul of man.

 

Would like to know your thoughts.

 

God Bless You,

David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Trish (MrsPentitent)    1/13/2002 7:17 pm  
To:  karen (karen10051)   (34 of 87)  
 
  238.34 in reply to 238.29  
 
Hi Karen,

<<What i find kind of interesting, is that Mrs. Penitant (his wife) stated in another post on another thread "My first husband used to phisically and verbally abuse me so I've been in that situation before."...indicating that she had been previously married and divorced because of abuse>>

Actually I didn't say whether I was divorced or not, you just assumed it. And btw.......I was widowed at the age of 32 because my first husband died of a massive heart attack. Might be a good idea to ask next time instead of assuming something.

Blessings!

 

 



Host Our Daily Bread

Our Daily Bread 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  karen (karen10051)   1/13/2002 7:19 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (35 of 87)  
 
  238.35 in reply to 238.32  
 
Oh, well i divorced my husband due to serial adultery..for which he showed no repentance, and even began to bring them home for dinner. 
One small point...not just "whores" get aids...if you have ever seen a wee babe born with it, or someone who received it through a seemingly innocent blood transfusion, you wouldnt speak so cavalerly of it. 

karen

<#### src="http://www.geocities.com/prisca107/karen.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="230" height="210">  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  karen (karen10051)   1/13/2002 7:20 pm  
To:  Trish (MrsPentitent)    (36 of 87)  
 
  238.36 in reply to 238.34  
 
What an excellent idea!! You are quite correct...please pass that suggestion on to everyone on the forum. The habit seems to be rampant here and i simply caught the bug. My apologies. 
karen

<#### src="http://www.geocities.com/prisca107/karen.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="230" height="210">  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/13/2002 7:22 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (37 of 87)  
 
  238.37 in reply to 238.31  
 
...(Shammai) than the liberal Hillel... 
Theological teachings of these two had nothing to do with it. 
__________________________________________________________________ 
What is the "it" you refer to? I made it clear that these rabbis' influence was prevalent at Jesus' time when the Pharisees put this question about divorce on the table. If one reads Matthew 19, one will see the Word tells us the Pharisees were TEMPTING Jesus by this question. One school of thought said a man could divorce his wife if he did not like her cooking, the other spectrum, only if she was not a virgin on the wedding night. Quite a difference of opinion. Notice their question FIRST was divorce for 'every cause'. To that Jesus replied by exalting marriage and being against divorce..so then they think they have Jesus cornered by thinking he is teaching against the Mosaic law so they challenge him there. Jesus explains why Moses gave the allowance for divorce, clearly siding with the stricter standard. 
As an aside, I had to write a 25 page research paper on this passage and the topic of divorce in seminary. I say that to simply point out that if one does even a little research on this, one will QUICKLY run into the whole Hillel, Shammai argument of the day. Any detailed commentary on the passage will discuss the issue. 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - 

YOU ALSO WROTE: 

This was strictly Moses idea. God gave him divorce for adultery! Moses added the divorce for convenience! Even Jesus admits that Moses was responsible the convenience command, not the Father! 
____________________________________________________________________ 
This seems to infer Moses gave within the law something that was not God's Will. You seem to come to this conclusion because Jesus uses the term "Moses suffered you..." (Matt 19:8). That is a faulty premise unless you are consistent in the premise - and if you are consistent, then it leads us down a slippery slope. 

Jesus uses the same similiar phrase "Moses commanded or Moses gave.." in Matt 8:4 (leprosy offerings), Mk 7:10 (5th commandment), and elsewhere....even calling it the Law of Moses (Lk 24:44). 

Jesus equates anything Moses wrote or said in the Scriptures as being straight from God...if you make an exception in this divorce situation, you must also make the same exception in these other situations...but no exception need be made if (as I pointed out) one understands the background as to why this question was put to Jesus in such a way, by such people. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/13/2002 7:29 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (38 of 87)  
 
  238.38 in reply to 238.33  
 
I think we agree too on this David... 
Just like God did not want Israel to have a king. But the Word also says God gave them a king. Why? Because they insisted on a having a king like the other nations. 

They insisted on meat in the wilderness, not satisfied with God's miraculous faithful provision of manna each day...so God gave them their desire. 

God's ideal for marriage is obviously to be until death. Jesus allows for rare exceptions in the case of fornication, and Paul gives further examples too. Moses did not teach anything opposite to Jesus, for that would mean Moses did not teach what God wanted OR (as the Pharisees believed) Jesus was teaching against God (which obviously requires a denial of His deity). 

Moses allowed for divorce to to 'uncleanness' (Deut 24:1). The rabbinical controversy surrounded what that word means (like what does 'working on the Sabbath mean')..Jesus explained what God (through Moses) meant by uncleanness by his comments on fornication. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/13/2002 10:32 pm  
To:  karen (karen10051)   (39 of 87)  
 
  238.39 in reply to 238.35  
 
I have compassion for those innocents that are subjected to it! However, I have very little compassion for anyone who involves themselves knowingly in unGodly practices, for the only end to that can be destruction! AID's is a disease of homosexuality which is an abomination to God. There will be only one cure for it, and that is the abandonment of homosexual activity!
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/13/2002 10:44 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (40 of 87)  
 
  238.40 in reply to 238.37  
 
<<<Jesus equates anything Moses wrote or said in the Scriptures as being straight from God...>>> 
I agree that a majority of it did. Why would Jesus say it came from Moses if it didn't? I do study, but only God's Word with the Holy Spirits guidance! Which is what we are all told to do.The only thing seminaries can do is totally mess up your understanding by clogging it with Theological harangue that has no basis in the Word of God! 

<<<What is the "it" you refer to?>>> 

The "it" is the fact that Moses and Moses alone was responsible for the "convenience divorce"! Jesus said so. If I remember right, that was the point of this discussion. Not whether Hillel or Shammai had anything to do with it; or even that the Pharisees were tempting or testing. With all due respect, this is the same kind of Theological claptrap that preachers use to make themselves right, even though it's not what the Bible says.

May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  karen (karen10051)   1/14/2002 4:11 am  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (41 of 87)  
 
  238.41 in reply to 238.39  
 
Aids is a disease of homosexuality? Do you REALLY believe that if there wasn't another gay person on the planet tomorrow AIDS would be gone? Wow. You live a real sheltered life. 
karen

<#### src="http://www.geocities.com/prisca107/karen.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="230" height="210">  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/14/2002 2:39 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (42 of 87)  
 
  238.42 in reply to 238.40  
 
I agree that a majority of it did. Why would Jesus say it came from Moses if it didn't? I do study, but only God's Word with the Holy Spirits guidance! Which is what we are all told to do.The only thing seminaries can do is totally mess up your understanding by clogging it with Theological harangue that has no basis in the Word of God! 
____________________________________________________________________ 
This makes a few times that you seem to 'put down' education when that education is beyond your personal experience. 
I would simply remind you that Ephesians 4 tells us God gave certain people special gifts of the Holy Spirit to act as teachers of the rest of the body of Christ, for the perfecting of the saints and the edifying of the body. If you think that nobody in the history of the church (whether living and teaching in seminaries or pulpits today, or whether dead whose writings are still with us) is capable of teaching you anything than I feel sorry for you. Truly I do, because you obviously have strong opinions, but those opinions are being formed with only partial knowledge. 

I assume you go to church and hope your pastor teaches from the Word of God. If you listen to him, then why is it so bad to read the messages of another brother from 100 years ago in book form. Either way you are being taught the word of God. And chances are your pastor attended a seminary for part of his training. 

Understanding the background of the Bible is crucial. You think it is foolish to study what the Roman Empire was like, how they governed the people of Israel, what the different sects like Pharisees and Sadduccees believed, what the Greek culture that Paul had to deal with so often in his letters is all a waste of time?? 

How about Biblical studies on customs and manners of the people, what they wore, how they dressed, what a Jewish marriage is all about. Such background is crucial in understanding the New testament, and the same is true for the background of the Old Testament. 

I know that if I studied about life in Brazil for a couple years, I would be very interested to discuss with someone who LIVED there for 20 years. He or she might show me some insights on which I had made wrong conclusions based on my limited study. 

But then again I have a teachable spirit and want to learn and am willing to entertain ideas that at first seem different than my views. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/14/2002 6:34 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (43 of 87)  
 
  238.43 in reply to 238.42  
 
<<<God gave certain people special gifts of the Holy Spirit to act as teachers>>> 
Teachers of His Word, not Calvins, Henrys, or Spurgeon! His command was to teach the Word of god, not mans! When your explanations and definitions involve more than the Word of God; they then become the word of man. 

<<<your pastor attended a seminary for part of his training.>>> 

My last four or five Pastors all went to seminaries or colleges! But they always preached more of what this man taught or that man taught, than the actual Word of God. No, God is my only Pastor at present! 

<<<Understanding the background of the Bible is crucial....How about Biblical studies on customs and manners of the people, what they wore, how they dressed, what a Jewish marriage is all about.>>> 

None of anything you mentioned has any relevence to knowing Jesus, His Word, or being saved! 

<<<He or she might show me some insights on which I had made wrong conclusions based on my limited study.>>> 

The only insight that matters is that of God. The Bible specifically says that there will be many false prophets and they are full of lies! So anything you learn from any materials outside the true Word of God, has no truth unless the Bible backs it up! And what they wore or ate in 32 A.D. has no bearing on these teachings whatsoever! 

<<<am willing to entertain ideas that at first seem different than my views.>>> 

First impressions are usually right. If they seem different from your Biblical views, it is probably because they are! 





May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    1/15/2002 1:28 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (44 of 87)  
 
  238.44 in reply to 238.43  
 
Hi Penitent,

 

It looks like you are exaggerating a bit. Of course you believe that God can and does speak through people in normal conversation or you wouldnt bother to post so many instructional postings.

 

It is the entire purpose and existence of this Forum to encourage one another in a Godly walk and Much of that is achieved through the conversational posting.

 

I also find that your posts have no or few Direct Bible Quotes, although you have an occasional Bible reference, and therefore your posts do not even meet your own standards of Biblical content.

 

It sounds like what you are saying is that only you have the knowledge of right and wrong and that fellowship, wisdom and counsel cannot come from others. It is a poor choice to be and island and I hope that you will reconsider and join a fellowship so that they can be blessed by your presence and you can be blessed by theirs.

 

Hebrews 10:24,25 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

 

God Bless You,

David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/15/2002 5:52 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (45 of 87)  
 
  238.45 in reply to 238.44  
 
<<<...to encourage one another in a Godly walk>>> 
Yes, we are to encourage those who have a grasp on the true Word of God; But we are also to inform a fellow Christian when they veer off that path! 

<<<I also find that your posts have no or few Direct Bible Quotes>>> 

I put Bible Quotes where they are necessary! I do not see them necessary on those basic things that all Christians, even new Christians should know! But will strive to do so in the future! 

<<<do not even meet your own standards of Biblical content.>>> 

I haven't said anything that cannot be backed scripturally. Everything I say is backed by scripture. If you think I have, post them back, and I will provide the back-up. 

<<<It sounds like what you are saying is that only you have the knowledge of right and wrong and that fellowship, wisdom and counsel cannot come from others.>>> 

Not I, but the Bible has that knowledge and as I said, point me to what I've said that is not backed, and I'll back it! Fellowship should be with those of like mind. Wisdom and counsel should only come from God to prevent misunderstandings. 

Jeremiah 9:4 "Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother: for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbour will walk with slanders." 

Micah 7:5 "Trust ye not in a friend, put ye not confidence in a guide..." 

1 Corinthians 3:21 "Therefore let no man glory in men." 

2 Corinthians 1:9 "...that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead:" 

1 Timothy 6:20 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:" 

We are told to trust in God and His Word, not profane and vain words of science. Do you realize that all the things, the Hillel or Shammai argument, etc. is Theology. Theology is the science of religion. This is not what we are to teach. We are to teach only the Word of God! We are told to trust not even ourself for meaning, but God! And because of the following verse, I am a tad strenuous in getting that point across; but then anyone that has Christ in them should be interested only in His truth, not man's science! 

2 Corinthians 11:10 "As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting..." 

As far as the next verse, I've noticed you have a habit of telling everyone that they have a good point, even though the points disagree! Jesus wasn't here to give lip service and neither are we! If they are wrong you should tell them. You shouldn't be worried about pleasing people to keep them here, but helping teach what is right and what is wrong in God's Word, because it won't be long before God Himself will be judging them for what they rightly or wrongly believe. 

1 Thessalonians 2:4 "But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts." 

And if you think that Christians are to avoid all confrontation; we are told to stand up for His Word, that we [if we are truly of God] will not be accepted by this world, and eventually be killed for our beliefs! If you tell people the true Word of God, for example: woman not preaching or having authority in a Christian family, there is confrontation! If you preach the Theological psychobabble that most seminaries teach now, that women are completely equal to men after they accept Christ, there is no confrontation. This is because it denies that part of God's Word, and to deny any part is denying it all! Think and study, my brother, for the time is nearer than most think! 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  karen (karen10051)   1/15/2002 7:03 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (46 of 87)  
 
  238.46 in reply to 238.45  
 
Wow..and your wife sounds so normal. 
karen

<#### src="http://www.geocities.com/prisca107/karen.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="230" height="210">  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/17/2002 12:20 am  
To:  karen (karen10051)   (47 of 87)  
 
  238.47 in reply to 238.46  
 
Normal is this world isn't very Godly! And believe it or not, she believes as I believe, strictly by the Bible. She is just a little more laid back in her retorts!
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  karen (karen10051)   1/17/2002 4:17 am  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (48 of 87)  
 
  238.48 in reply to 238.47  
 
I personally believe that you should be in prayer about how you present yourself...you do not come accross as a good witness for God or for Christianity. Here are the things we have learned about you: 
*Trust no one...so i guess you have no friends. 
*Listen to no one...because you cannot possibly learn anyhing from anyone else in the world. Everyone is wrong but you. 
*Everything that could possibly be conceived as fun is a sin, including imagination. 
*You know everything 

There are people on this forum who are far more Godly and knowledgeable about the bible than i am, and even they are drawing back from you. You are not interested in dialogue, you are interested in diatribe. 

Maybe your wife is more laid back, but my guess is that she probably gets along better in the world than you do. Do you work? How do you possibly keep a job if this is how you view everyone in the world. And how sad for you that you do not see the richness of human interaction. 

karen

<#### src="http://www.geocities.com/prisca107/karen.swf" quality=high pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="230" height="210">  
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/17/2002 7:10 pm  
To:  karen (karen10051)   (49 of 87)  
 
  238.49 in reply to 238.48  
 
<<<I personally believe that you should be in prayer about how you present yourself...>>> 
I have been and I'm presenting myself the way I'm instructed! 

<<<you do not come accross as a good witness for God or for Christianity.>>> 

And your basis is what? Because I don't preach like others? They are of the world or they would sound like me, preaching the truth from the Word of God! Jesus never told us to go around telling people what they want to hear. We are told to teach only God's truth! Yes, God does love us; but He also tells us to love one another to be truthful and instruct them when they veer from the Word! If I'm guilty of anything, it's doing what He has instructed me to do. If this grates on you, then I'm doing my job; because He tells me in His Word that I will not be accepted and that I will be persecuted for teaching the truth! 

<<<*Trust no one...so i guess you have no friends.>>> 

I have friends and family that accepts me as I am, probably because of my conviction! Do I trust them? Not like I trust God! We are to have faith in Him, not those of this world! Mind you, I might not always be as tact as I could, but the truth always hurts and always insures an attitude of denial from those it convicts! 

<<<*Listen to no one...because you cannot possibly learn anyhing from anyone else in the world. Everyone is wrong but you.>>> 

I listen to all, but only take to heart what God's Word [Without Theological perversion] backs up. If I say someone is wrong, then it's because the Bible does not agree with them either! 

<<<*Everything that could possibly be conceived as fun is a sin, including imagination.>>> 

When we accept Christ we are supposed to be dead to this world! We are not to take part in these secular delusions, but keep our focus on God and what's Godly! If your imagination has you thinking of being in Heaven with Jesus, I see no problem with it! If it has you involved in magic or lust or greed, the things of this world; it's best to turn it off! 

<<<*You know everything>>> 

I only know what God has taught me! If you have a problem with that, then you should take it up with Him! 

<<<There are people on this forum who are far more Godly and knowledgeable about the bible than i am>>> 

No one is anymore Godly than any other, if they have truly accepted God! They very well may be better educated, but if that education is not backed by God's Word; but by Matthew Henry or Martin Luther, then they may be less educated than you! 

<<<and even they are drawing back from you. You are not interested in dialogue, you are interested in diatribe.>>> 

I am interested in truth, and become a little vehement when people try to shove man's Theological garbage on me, perverting the Word of God in the process, because of a book or paper some man wrote that doesn't even agree with scripture. 

<<<Maybe your wife is more laid back, but my guess is that she probably gets along better in the world than you do.>>> 

We have everything in common, including those we know! 

<<<Do you work? How do you possibly keep a job if this is how you view everyone in the world.>>> 

Yes. I get along with everyone. And if you'll read your Bible, this is the same way Jesus and the Apostles viewed the world! 

<<<And how sad for you that you do not see the richness of human interaction.>>> 

With people that believe the WHOLE TRUE Word of God, interaction is great! With those that aren't of like-mind, we are supposed to withdraw ourselves from them. I'd rather be alone for the rest of my life and see God, then associate with fence-straddlers and unbelievers and go to my destruction! You should feel the same way as a child of God! 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/17/2002 8:50 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (50 of 87)  
 
  238.50 in reply to 238.40  
 
Moses alone was responsible for the "convenience divorce"! 
____________________________________________________________________ 
In several of your posts, you have used this phrase the 'convenience' divorce..attributing it to Moses, just like the above example I copied from one of your earlier replies. 
Please quote the verse and/or verses from the Word of God when the 'convenience' divorce was given by Moses. 

I would like to know of what passage(s) you speak, as I think would others following this discussion. 

Thank you.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/18/2002 12:11 am  
To:  StevenJn316   (51 of 87)  
 
  238.51 in reply to 238.50  
 
Notice how Jesus keeps saying Moses! "Moses then command" and "Moses because of the hardness of your heart! 
Matthew 19:6-9 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did MOSES THEN COMMAND to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, MOSES BECAUSE OF THE HARDNESS OF YOUR HEARTS suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. 

What did Moses command? That we were to write a bill of divorcement, not for adultery, just for any reason! Why else would Jesus say it wasn't like that from the beginning! From the beginning, divorce was only through fornication with one outside the marriage, Adultery! Moses changed it to please the people instead of God! Do you believe Moses never went against God's will? What about the staff on the rock? 
He didn't do as God ask him then either! 

Mark 10:2-12 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. And he answered and said unto them, WHAT DID MOSES COMMAND YOU? And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery. 

That's where the "convenience divorce" comes in. Moses provided it, not God! 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/18/2002 1:14 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (52 of 87)  
 
  238.52 in reply to 238.51  
 
You have made some rather strong opinionated comments against those who would interpret the Bible (calling it "man's wisdom" etc.) You also say it is a waste of time to read what is not 'straight Scripture'. 
Yet, it seems you may have wasted our time in your last post. You sure did not answer my simple question. 

Your reply is mostly your personal COMMENTARY of Jesus' words. 

I asked a simple question. Please cite the passage from the Word of God that you claim is when Moses in the law gave permission for 'convenient divorce'. If you and Jesus are in agreement on this idea of 'convenient divorce' then it would also be the passage that Jesus was referring to in his words which you quote. 

Just give the text (Whether in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers or Deuteronomy)...no interpretation, and nothing about the New Testament at this time, thank you. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/20/2002 3:55 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (53 of 87)  
 
  238.53 in reply to 238.52  
 
Read the last post. I quoted the scripture where Jesus Himself talked of Moses divorce. I can only inform, I cannot make you understand. If God gave the divorce for uncleanness, then what is left but convenience. The Pharisees said "put away", without giving for what reason. This denotes convenience to me. If you have a different interpretation, you have that right and we'll agree to disagree; but I will not discuss this any longer as I can say nothing more than what I have already stated! 
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/21/2002 12:41 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (54 of 87)  
 
  238.54 in reply to 238.53  
 
<<<Read the last post. I quoted the scripture where Jesus Himself talked of Moses divorce.>>> 
yes, which is not what I asked. Apparently you do not even know to which passage in the Old Testament Jesus was referring, or if you know, you refuse to say for fear it will show the weakness of your personal opinion in this regard when placed beside what God's Word teaches. 

But how on earth does one begin to interpret Jesus' words (as you have done here) without bothering to reference the passage the Lord is commenting upon. When the Lord speaks of Noah, Abraham, David and others in the Old Testament, do you not bother to read those passages to see what He is speaking of? If you insist (as you do) of ONLY letting the Scripture be the authority, why would you not refer to ALL the Scripture? 

<<<I can only inform, I cannot make you understand.>>> 

Except I have asked for information, and you reply with opinion and pontification. 

<<<If God gave the divorce for uncleanness, then what is left but convenience.>>> 

Well, this is new. Now you use the word "uncleanness". Care to say why? I seem to recall Moses using the phrase, but you insist Moses gave something different than what God gave....yet here you say God gave it.... 

<<<The Pharisees said "put away", without giving for what reason.>>> 

And I explained in great detail WHY they did not give a reason with my discussion on the two rabbinical schools of thought present at the time, to which the Pharisees were split on opinion. Yet, when I offered this you came back with some very harsh and negative replies to my "theological claptrap" etc. And you also said that was not a factor in the issue at all..Please re-read your earlier posts. 

<<<This denotes convenience to me. If you have a different interpretation, you have that right and we'll agree to disagree;>>> 

I am so glad to see you post this, since it goes against everything you wrote earlier, about how you only spoke the truth from God's word and those Christians with different opinions are following man's worldly wisdom etc. Again, you can re-read your earlier posts. 

<<<but I will not discuss this any longer as I can say nothing more than what I have already stated>>> 

Well, you can always post the verse from the Old Testament which supports your convenience interpretation...which is all I asked for to begin with. 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/21/2002 5:48 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (55 of 87)  
 
  238.55 in reply to 238.54  
 
Why do I have to post the verse you speak of with uncleanness, when you know it well. And as I said, this is not what Jesus referred too! Jesus referred to the fact that Moses allowed divorce for other than uncleanness! I suppose this is the verse that you refer to! If you'll notice the 3rd verse says "if he hate her"! This is not the reason God gave for divorce. He gave for uncleaness, not because you hate her! 
Deuteronomy 24:1-3 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 2. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 

<<<This denotes convenience to me. If you have a different interpretation, you have that right and we'll agree to disagree......"I am so glad to see you post this, since it goes against everything you wrote earlier," >>> 

I never said you didn't have the right to believe as you think. Though I believe it wrong, you still have that right! 

<<<with some very harsh and negative replies to my "theological claptrap">>> 

Sometimes the truth is harsh and I still believe this is Theological claptrap! It has no effect on what Jesus said or what the verses mean. As you yourself put it, this is just someone elses opinion! 

<<<Except I have asked for information, and you reply with opinion and pontification.>>> 

I gave you your verses and your information! But it is not opinion but written scripture! As for the pontification, I guess that fits you too since you say you're right. I am not Catholic and would never consider begin Catholic. I do not claim to be Christ on Earth as the Pope does. I told you what God has shown me. Not Hillel or Shammai or Gamaliel; these people have nothing to do with the Word that Christ and the Apostles taught! If someone had only the New Testament, they could still be saved and know what is required of them to maintain that salvation! How I explain it makes a lot more sense because I explained it in it's simplest terms and is actually backed by the verses, whereas you're two schools of Rabbinical thought are not! As a matter of fact, maybe you'll show me the scripture that actually says the Pharisees had these two different schools of thought going on and that's why they tempted Christ? 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/21/2002 10:48 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (56 of 87)  
 
  238.56 in reply to 238.55  
 
Jesus referred to the fact that Moses allowed divorce for other than uncleanness! I suppose this is the verse that you refer to! If you'll notice the 3rd verse says "if he hate her"! This is not the reason God gave for divorce. He gave for uncleaness, not because you hate her! 
Deuteronomy 24:1-3 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. 2. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. 3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; 
____________________________________________________________________ 
So if I understand your view, when Moses gave verse one of this passage in Deuteronomy he was speaking the will and Word of God...but when he spoke verse three of the same passage in the next breath, he then was speaking only as a man, and in fact giving something that God would not want the people to be governed by... 
Question...who gave verse two? Do you think God allowed for the woman to become another's wife...or was that also an invention by Moses against God's will? Naturally one must understand verse two before one can understand verse three, right? 

Question #2 (or clarification)..so you do think 'uncleanness' spoken of in verse one is sexual unfaithfulness, correct? 

And an off topic aside. You have repeated the fact that the New Testament is sufficient to lead to salvation..I have never said anything to the contrary, and the unbeliever MUST read the New Testament, asking God for guidance and to reveal His plan for salvation and He will. But as you well know, the Bible exhorts us (in Hebrews and elsewhere) to get off the milk and move onto the meat of the word, to not lay again the foundation of salvation...to do that, some understanding of Hebrew culture, issues and the like is very helpful. God does not want His children to stay babies after they get saved, rather we are to grow and develop in the Word. 

THIS is why I wanted you to comment on the actual OT passage. It makes the defense of your view easier to follow.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/22/2002 9:14 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (57 of 87)  
 
  238.57 in reply to 238.56  
 
<<<Question #2 (or clarification)..so you do think 'uncleanness' spoken of in verse one is sexual unfaithfulness, correct?>>> 
Yes. 

<<<So if I understand your view, when Moses gave verse one of this passage in Deuteronomy he was speaking the will and Word of God...but when he spoke verse three of the same passage in the next breath, he then was speaking only as a man, and in fact giving something that God would not want the people to be governed by...>>> 

Yes. 

<<<Question...who gave verse two? Do you think God allowed for the woman to become another's wife...or was that also an invention by Moses against God's will? Naturally one must understand verse two before one can understand verse three, right?>>> 

Yes. God gave it! But if He had given the third verse He would have said for uncleanness again. 

<<<And an off topic aside. You have repeated the fact that the New Testament is sufficient to lead to salvation..I have never said anything to the contrary, and the unbeliever MUST read the New Testament, asking God for guidance and to reveal His plan for salvation and He will.>>> 

You said that one must examine the Old Testament to understand the New Testament! Now you are contradicting yourself! 

<<<But as you well know, the Bible exhorts us (in Hebrews and elsewhere) to get off the milk and move onto the meat of the word, to not lay again the foundation of salvation...to do that, some understanding of Hebrew culture, issues and the like is very helpful. God does not want His children to stay babies after they get saved, rather we are to grow and develop in the Word.>>> 

The foundation of salvation is Jesus Christ and that is taught in the New Testament. You can also get the meat from Jesus and the Apostles. Now please tell me where it says in Hebrews, Gentiles are required to read the Old Testament? I do, but I'd like to know where it says that! And please answer with the scripture I asked you for to prove what you say about the Pharisees! we are commanded to witness the love of Christ, what He did for us, and salvation! You'll also have to show me scripture that says we are to learn and teach the Old Testament! Granted there are passages that tell of the coming Messiah, and books that teach Prophecy; but anything we need to know about Christ, we can find in the New. Even prophecy of the signs of the endtime can be found in the New. Sure the Old is informative, but not necessary for salvation or teaching what people need for salvation. Actually with as many people as there are trying to second-guess God by figuring the time; it might be a negative factor for most! 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/22/2002 10:04 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (58 of 87)  
 
  238.58 in reply to 238.57  
 


<<<Question #2 (or clarification)..so you do think 'uncleanness' spoken of in verse one is sexual unfaithfulness, correct?>>> 
Yes. 
<<<So if I understand your view, when Moses gave verse one of this passage in Deuteronomy he was speaking the will and Word of God...but when he spoke verse three of the same passage in the next breath, he then was speaking only as a man, and in fact giving something that God would not want the people to be governed by...>>> 

Yes. 

<<<Question...who gave verse two? Do you think God allowed for the woman to become another's wife...or was that also an invention by Moses against God's will? Naturally one must understand verse two before one can understand verse three, right?>>> 

Yes. God gave it! But if He had given the third verse He would have said for uncleanness again. 
_____________________________________________________________________ 
So Moses only gave an out for convenient divorce to a man who took a chance and married a known adulterer...that would be a limited number of marriages, would it not. It certainly is not the topic of marriage in the general sense that it seemed was before Jesus at the time he was asked. 
______________________________________________________________________ 

<<<You said that one must examine the Old Testament to understand the New Testament! Now you are contradicting yourself! >>>> 

I never said that about salvation. I said it was needful to understand the parts of the New Testament that reference the Old. Your comment above is way too broad to anything I implied. Example: Jesus once simply said "Remember Lot's wife". How can one understand that comment without an understanding of the Genesis account?? 

<<<The foundation of salvation is Jesus Christ and that is taught in the New Testament.>>>> 

I agree. Question though. Throughout Acts we read of the apostles in their witness to others 'reasoning from the Scriptures' and leading people to Jesus Christ, through the Scriptures. Given the New testament was not even written yet, which Scriptures were they using to lead the people to the Messiah?? 

<<< Now please tell me where it says in Hebrews, Gentiles are required to read the Old Testament? I do, but I'd like to know where it says that!>>> 

So you do something God does not tell you to do? What is the point of asking this question. If you believe the Old Testament is also the Word of God, then it should be studied as well. The New Testament writers quote constantly from the Old. Question: When Paul claims he was innocent of the blood of the (gentile) Ephesians because he had declared the WHOLE counsel of God..to what was he referring? Of course I study and read the New Testament much more than the Old, as should every Christian. 

<<< And please answer with the scripture I asked you for to prove what you say about the Pharisees!>>> 

Excuse me, isn't this where your argument with me began? I never said the Hillel, Shammai issue was detailed in the Scripture. But just like the nonScriptural views on the Sabbath were constantly being dealt with by Jesus (and thus an understanding of those views is helpful to better grasp the issue at hand) so the nonScriptural divorce argument is helpful to understand WHy the Pharisees asked the Lord in the way they did - an admission I recall you making that you did not know to what they were referring. An issue I answered and was chastised for doing so via theological claptrap. 

<<< Granted there are passages that tell of the coming Messiah,>>> 

Yes, and that is the proof pointed to by Peter that the Bible is written by God and not mere man. Without the proof of inerrant prophecy, the argument for the Bible as God's Word has a tough road ahead of it (at least Peter thought so, so I will cast my lot with the apostle on this one). 

<<< but anything we need to know about Christ, we can find in the New.>>> 

Where does Jesus return at His 2nd coming at the end of the tribulation? The answer is only found in Isaiah. That detail may not be crucial for salvation, but it refutes your statement that ANYTHING about Christ is found in the New alone. 

<<< Even prophecy of the signs of the endtime can be found in the New. Sure the Old is informative, but not necessary for salvation or teaching what people need for salvation.>>> 

Agree 100% 

<< Actually with as many people as there are trying to second-guess God by figuring the time; it might be a negative factor for most! >>> 

LOL, that is sure true too. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/24/2002 7:00 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (59 of 87)  
 
  238.59 in reply to 238.58  
 
<<<So Moses only gave an out for convenient divorce to a man who took a chance and married a known adulterer>>> 
You'll have to ask Moses for the reason for this. All I know is since God tells us that we can hate no one, then this is a verse He had nothing to do with! 

<<<Jesus once simply said "Remember Lot's wife".>>> 

He used this as an example to not turn or look back on the "Day of the Lord". Since He explained it in the verses before, it wouldn't be necessary to know about what happened to Lot's wife; but a statement like this would stoke the curiosity in anyone! Still I said it was not necessary, not that it wasn't interesting! 

<<<Throughout Acts we read of the apostles in their witness to others 'reasoning from the Scriptures'>>> 

The Word, the scripture, has been forever. Jesus knew what was in the New Testament, as the Apostles learned, or they couldn't have wrote them. But I do agree in this case they were talking of the Old because the New wasn't known yet. However, after the New Testament was written, the Old Testament, though it's still what Orthodox Jews follow, is not what we as Christians, with Jesus and the Apostles laying out a path for us, are to follow! Then we'd be Jews and they rejected Jesus! 

<<<I never said the Hillel, Shammai issue was detailed in the Scripture.>>> 

So where you have the right to demand scripture from me, which I provide; you expect me to take your word about this secular garbage, that man distorts the Word of God with! If I remember right you told me I shouldn't be teaching what couldn't be backed up by scripture too? So why do you? 

<<<so the nonScriptural divorce argument is helpful to understand WHy the Pharisees asked the Lord in the way they did>>> 

The way they asked wasn't the point being made. The point is God hates divorce, and Moses allowed that which God didn't! No matter how the Pharisees looked at it, it still has the same point! It's what Jesus says that's important, not what the Pharisees thought! 

<<<So you do something God does not tell you to do?>>> 

God does tell me to read it, but not for dissecting and perverting the New Testament, He also tells me to live by. 

<<<Without the proof of inerrant prophecy, the argument for the Bible as God's Word has a tough road ahead of it>>> 

The same proof lies in the New Testament in Jesus own Words. So I reiterate, without the Old Testament, a Christian could still know and do what is expected of them! Oh, and Pauls and Johns! 

<<<Where does Jesus return at His 2nd coming at the end of the tribulation?>>> 

The New Testament tells us that all eyes will see Him when He returns. It also tells us to be sober and vigilant! Through these I'll know when He returns! Where doesn't matter since all eyes will see Him. He also says His people will know Him! I would say the where your dwelling on is probably the least important aspect of His return! And He'll split the Eastern Sky when He returns! Please remit the scripture from Isaiah that talks about it. Like David told me, if you mention it; then post the scripture with it, please! 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  StevenJn316   1/25/2002 2:32 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (60 of 87)  
 
  238.60 in reply to 238.59  
 
We have probably gone as far on this as is profitable. We both believe BOTH Testaments are the Word of God, and that the New is certainly more important than the Old for the Christian to study and read. 
If I asked you to back up from the Word of God, it was because your entire point of view was that it alone was the only thing worth studying, and that you could obtain 100% perfect complete understanding - even though a couple of your views seemed like personal interpretation which you later admitted to. Why then it would be so wrong or a waste of time to read the personal interpretations of other Christians I still do not understand..but that is OK. 

I, however, never made the same claim, in fact I said outside studies of the culture, history, views and other ancient historical facts we have learned through archaeology can be very helpful to a fruitful study of the Bible. NOT (and this is what you got very focused on) that it was necessary to understand the plan of salvation. One needs no additional helps other than the Bible for that. And that is most important of course. 

I speak from personal experience alone, that it has helped my study of the Bible to know more about what exactly the Pharisees, Sadducees and the like thought on a variety of issues. What were the laws they were supposed to follow at trial (and thus how those laws were broken at Jesus' trial). What a Jewish marriage was like (THAT one is really a mindblower when one sees how often the marriage is used symbolically of our relationship to the Lord, as well as in His many parables). Being a Gentile, I can miss out on some of the very Jewish ideas, phrases and the like (Like when jesus told us to hate our spouses, parents, children or we are not worthy of being his disciple in Luke..you said God tells us to never hate anyone..well that is wrong in one sense. Jesus said it in black and white. But WHY did he use that phrase) 

Why were tax collectors so hated. Well, you have to read a little Roman and Jewish history to find out. One the one hand, you may say all a Christian NEEDS to know is that they were hated, and the Bible makes that clear. OK, but I like to know WHY as well. You mentioned the WHY the Pharisees asked their question on divorce was meaningless. 

Well, you can't interpret the Bible without complete observation of the passage. Who is there, where and when the event took place. What and of course WHY are also important, as any investigative reporter will tell you. 

Much like a person can be perfectly happy eating a deer for its meat, I also want to see if I can find a use for the antlers and the rest. The meat is the most important, but I want to get every last ounce of understanding from God's Word as I can. 

If you want a final word on the subject, I will certainly read it. But I think we are at danger of going round and round on something we simply have different levels of interest in. 

God Bless You.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/26/2002 5:30 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (61 of 87)  
 
  238.61 in reply to 238.60  
 
My intention, as yours, is not to get into anything more than a discussion! Although sometimes the tone may seem aggressive, it is not meant as an attack! I do take offense to the fact that you depend on other than the Word of God for understand. Since the Word is the only truth, and since you have no idea as to the origin or the validity of the other materials; they shouldn't be something that you use for "better understanding" as you put it! they could be lies from the pits of Hell and steer you in a direction other than the direction God intended you to follow! God will not stop you from making that change. Many believe God will keep them from messing up and following something not of His Word. That's true to a point. I believe that's why we are speaking. But, in turn, you still have your free will. I can tell you not to dilute what you learn with outside influence, but you don't have to listen. Again, I entreat you, out of concern, to depend on just the Word of God and the Holy Spirit for your understanding and withdraw from the theological teachings! You are an intelligent person and should realize that if anything else you read has no effect, then it is a waste of time! Time which could be better spent seeking the understanding from the Spirit!
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  karen (karen10051)   1/27/2002 9:13 am  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (62 of 87)  
 
  238.62 in reply to 238.30  
 
HI...i have a question. It is an honest question, and i will NOT argue with your answer. I have been thinking alot about your stance lately and i would like to know: Do you read anything at all except the bible? Do you read newspapers or magazines? Novels? Textbooks? Do you go to the doctor? Do you believe he should read research? 
I am honestly curious 

karen
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/27/2002 12:02 pm  
To:  karen (karen10051)   (63 of 87)  
 
  238.63 in reply to 238.62  
 
<<<Do you read anything at all except the bible?>>> 
Yes, I do; but I don't use anything but the Bible when discussing God's Word. The Bible is the only "Truth"! Anything else has no meaning, nor bearing as far as God's Word is concerned! 

<<<Do you read newspapers or magazines? Novels? Textbooks?>>> I use to read some of the Christian magazines until I realized how much humanist, secular garbage they wrapped in the pages with spots of God's Word, here and there! No, I don't read novels or newspapers. Why would anyone choose reading a novel over the Bible! Newspapers tend to slant the news to their humanist worldly way, they think it should read. I do listen to Christian news on the radio. In these things that I do read or listen to, if I find them to be blasphemous to God; they go in the trash, or the fire, or get cut off! There is no reason for a Christian to dwell where God is not! 

<<<Textbooks? Do you go to the doctor? Do you believe he should read research? >>> 

Yes. Read my CDL textbook and got my license. Just because I don't believe in reading humanist garbage that others claim have a bearing on the Word, doesn't mean I don't believe a student shouldn't read what's required to learn their trade! This has nothing to do with reading garbage that dilutes and pollutes the Word of God! Speaking of doctors, I heard a speaker on a Christian broadcast this morning talking about Hippocrates. All doctors take the "Hippocratic Oath", or used to anyway, which proclaims they are here to heal, not kill. Hippocrates would not adminster "Abortive" services, but look how many doctors jump at the chance today. It was against God's law to kill babies then, just as it should be now; but there are still some denominations that stretch their beliefs to justify certain or all abortions. Again, we should only trust the Bible!

May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rtartan   1/27/2002 12:05 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (64 of 87)  
 
  238.64 in reply to 238.51  
 
Your words attack the authority of Scripture more effectively than most liberals can. God either was in the midst of writing the books of Moses 100% or he was not. If you think he was not, then scripture is just another book to pick and choose from. 
Why not say that God allowed Moses to write it that way because at that time, they were not ready for a better way.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/27/2002 12:17 pm  
To:  Rtartan   (65 of 87)  
 
  238.65 in reply to 238.64  
 
No attack, Biblical truth. Jesus, Himself, acknowledges it.
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rtartan   1/27/2002 12:21 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (66 of 87)  
 
  238.66 in reply to 238.63  
 
><<<Do you read anything at all except the bible?>>>< 

>>Yes, I do; but I don't use anything but the Bible when discussing God's Word. The Bible is the only "Truth"! Anything else has no meaning, nor bearing as far as God's Word is concerned!<< 
I find this quite facinating because, Paul and some of the other authors of the NT were clearly well read. Paul quotes some things from Authors who were anything but believers. He used examples from greek literature to help convey the Gosple. 

Likewise, I can and have used Shakespear, "The Lord of the Flies," Woody Allen movies, "Saving Pvt. Ryan," Hemingway and many others to make points about scriptural truths to people who have poor knowlege of scripture, do not accept scripture as authoritative, or who are so blinded by the current cultural filters that they cannot recognise what scripture says. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rtartan   1/27/2002 12:35 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (67 of 87)  
 
  238.67 in reply to 238.65  
 
The assumption of your reading is that Jesus was saying the "Moses went off the reservation in his writings from time to time" which leads to the question "How many other times?" and the gate is wide open to chucking any part of scripture that we don't fancy. 
With your reading, the entire sermon on the mount was a rebuke to the inspiration of the writings of Moses, yet I do not believe this at all. 

I think my interp is really the best for maintaining scriptural integrity. God had Moses write what he wrote, knowing that there was goint to be "upgrades" coming later. Moses himself spoke of coming "upgades" and that in no way diminishes his integrity or the reality that God's word really was given to Moses.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/27/2002 5:24 pm  
To:  Rtartan   (68 of 87)  
 
  238.68 in reply to 238.66  
 
<<<Likewise, I can and have used Shakespear, "The Lord of the Flies," Woody Allen movies, "Saving Pvt. Ryan," Hemingway and many others to make points about scriptural truths to people who have poor knowlege of scripture, do not accept scripture as authoritative, or who are so blinded by the current cultural filters that they cannot recognise what scripture says.>>> 
Today in my sermon I used a contrast between Robinson Crusoe and the currently popular Cast Away movie..as having similar basic plots, but showing the lack of sensitivity towards God's protection (and thus no gratitude) in the current man versus the 17th century novel, where Crusoe (though also not a religious man at first) comes to a great understanding of his own sin and rebellion, God's hand of protection and the like. I think it made a decent point at the time. By the way, the sermon was clearly a Bible sermon as well...this being about 45 seconds of an otherwise 50 minute message. But I agree that can make an effective point. 

You are right about Paul being well read and doing the same thing, namely quoting to his Gentile audience from a work which they would be aware of.. 




 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/27/2002 7:19 pm  
To:  Rtartan   (69 of 87)  
 
  238.69 in reply to 238.67  
 
So, by what you say, it keeps Moses from writing that which God didn't instruct; but makes God a liar, because He said it was alright in the OT, but when Jesus came had changed His mind. How is this more acceptable. This part of the Old Testament is the list of Mosaic Laws. 
It was given to us to show us what laws the Jews were expected to follow. But even Jesus said they had veered from the true law. He also said Moses wrote the "if you hate her" divorce, because He was pressured by the people. He was wrong in writing this, just as Peter was wrong in saying that all had to be circumsized that came to Christ. If you believe Moses was perfect and couldn't make a mistake, then why was he disallowed from the "Promise Land"! I believe he wrote, that Jesus said he was wrong in writing, and that it was to show that even the most faithful can be pressured into making a mistake against God's Will. Incidentally, it is not our job to preserve "Scriptural Integrity", but God's! Do you believe yourself powerful enough to usurp His position?
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rtartan   1/27/2002 8:40 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (70 of 87)  
 
  238.70 in reply to 238.69  
 
>>So, by what you say, it keeps Moses from writing that which God didn't instruct; but makes God a liar, because He said it was alright in the OT, but when Jesus came had changed His mind. How is this more acceptable. This part of the Old Testament is the list of Mosaic Laws.<< 
Like I said, if we follow your logic, the entire Sermon on the Mount was a rebuff to Moses. That likewise is nonsense. 

What we see is, remember back to bible school, progressive revelation. Neither Moses nor God were liars, God moved the Children of Israel along the line to a better position. 

I want to caution you here. You are standing now in the place of Korah. 

>>If you believe Moses was perfect and couldn't make a mistake, then why was he disallowed from the "Promise Land"!<< 

but the Bible specifically SAID what his sin was. It was NAMED. You have no basis for continuing your Korah-speach. 

>>I believe he wrote, that Jesus said he was wrong in writing, and that it was to show that even the most faithful can be pressured into making a mistake against God's Will.<< 

Then How about "an eye for an eye" was that a sin of Moses too? 

How about looking at a woman with Lust? Did he soften that one up too? 

>>Incidentally, it is not our job to preserve "Scriptural Integrity", but God's! Do you believe yourself powerful enough to usurp His position?<< 

Huh? 

So when someone distorts scripture we let them? Or is all scripture useful for rebuke? I don't put up with people who do not take God's word seriously. Peter said that those who criticized Paul were fit for destruction, how much more those who would call Moses a liar and a false prophet. 

"Ye do err not knowing the scriptures."
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/27/2002 9:05 pm  
To:  Rtartan   (71 of 87)  
 
  238.71 in reply to 238.70  
 
<<<So when someone distorts scripture we let them?>>> 
We allow them to every time they print a new interpretation. It is up to us individually to prove or disprove it by the Bible! Our trust is in God, not man. This includes Moses. 

<<<Or is all scripture useful for rebuke?...Peter said that those who criticized Paul were fit for destruction, how much more those who would call Moses a liar and a false prophet. >>> 

This scripture was under discussion because Jesus said Moses erred. He didn't say Moses was a false prophet or a liar either. I didn't either, but Moses did err. 

<<<I don't put up with people who do not take God's word seriously.>>> 

I take it quite seriously, but I don't try to change the meaning of what is written. Either Moses erred, as Jesus said, or Jesus is a liar! I believe Moses erred cause Jesus said so, which do you believe? 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rtartan   1/27/2002 10:13 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (72 of 87)  
 
  238.72 in reply to 238.71  
 
Moses himself said that his word was far from the LAST word. It was God's word thus far. This is not a difficult concept. 
Like I said, according to your construction Jesus was not giving an UPGRADE, on this all these other points I had mentioned, and many more that I have not. (Again, I am not here to do your homework for you.) My interpretation, (heck it isn't really mine, go ask your pastor, if he doesn't agree with me, tell me where he went to school, *IF* he went to school.) is pretty standard, and allows both Moses and Jesus to be true. 

Jesus did not say that Moses erred, he said that divorce was ALLOWED, because of the Hardness of their hearts. Jesus gave us a PROGRESSION in law.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    1/28/2002 1:33 pm  
To:  Rtartan   (73 of 87)  
 
  238.73 in reply to 238.72  
 
Matthew 19:8  He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 
You can twist this anyway you want, my brother, but it specifically says "Moses, because of the hardnes of their hearts suffered you to put away your wives"; not, "God allowed Moses because of the hardness of their hearts to suffer them to put away their wives"! Methinks, thou is reading too much into it! If someone does something of their own accord that doesn't agree with God's teachings, without God's permission; I would definitely call that an err! Fact is fact and you cannot change it, no matter how much you rationalize or liberalize it. 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rtartan   1/28/2002 2:01 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (74 of 87)  
 
  238.74 in reply to 238.73  
 
I do not hear the words of those who slander Prophets, nor do I hear the words of those who attribute meanings to words that originally they did not have. 
If Jesus was really rebuffing Moses, no one would have had to hear a word he had to say, and more importantly, no one SHOULD HAVE According to MOSES, that provides the standard on Judging who Messiah is, Jesus then couldn't BE the Messiah (Deut.13). 

You are now on my ignore list, so don't bother responding.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  StevenJn316   1/28/2002 3:11 pm  
To:  Rtartan   (75 of 87)  
 
  238.75 in reply to 238.74  
 
You can see my discussion earlier, but I think you and I can come to agreement on this as we seem to be in the same ballpark. Jesus pointed the people to the BEGINNING, meaning Adam and Eve, also meaning BEFORE the Fall. God's ideal plan for marriage, one man, one woman for life - as seen when He created the institution of marriage. 
The fall brought sin into the world and thus men with "hard hearts". That is all Jesus said, because of the hardness of hearts God allowed Moses to offer a divorce option. Jesus did not say "Moses erred" he did not say this was for "convenience" he did not say the "people pressured Moses" nor does the Scripture say that elsewhere. Yet, all have been surmised to have been said within this thread. 

The New Testament is clear that the law is holy, just and good. Is the law sin? God forbid said Paul. (Romans) Jesus also attributed other parts of the law by simply saying "Moses gave you..."...the reason for doing so is that ALL his audience recognized that when Moses spoke the law, he was speaking for God. I think your reference to Korah is right on the mark. 

And as an aside, Moses was not allowed in the Promised Land because he misrepresented God before the people when striking the rock rather than speaking to it. Of course he was not perfect, but to imply imperfection kept one out of the Promised Land would imply then that Joshua and the thousands who entered were perfect...that makes NO sense of course.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Rtartan   1/28/2002 4:18 pm  
To:  StevenJn316   (76 of 87)  
 
  238.76 in reply to 238.75  
 
<<You can see my discussion earlier, but I think you and I can come to agreement on this as we seem to be in the same ballpark.>> 
Whodathunkit?!? <vbg> 

<<Jesus pointed the people to the BEGINNING, meaning Adam and Eve, also meaning BEFORE the Fall. God's ideal plan for marriage, one man, one woman for life - as seen when He created the institution of marriage.>> 

Agreed. 

<<The fall brought sin into the world and thus men with "hard hearts". That is all Jesus said, because of the hardness of hearts God allowed Moses to offer a divorce option. Jesus did not say "Moses erred" he did not say this was for "convenience" he did not say the "people pressured Moses" nor does the Scripture say that elsewhere. Yet, all have been surmised to have been said within this thread.>> 

Agreed again. There are lots of things that God did not want to happen to us that are the result of sin, and while he allowed somethings for a season, and later he shows us a better way. 

<<The New Testament is clear that the law is holy, just and good. Is the law sin? God forbid said Paul. (Romans) Jesus also attributed other parts of the law by simply saying "Moses gave you..."...the reason for doing so is that ALL his audience recognized that when Moses spoke the law, he was speaking for God. I think your reference to Korah is right on the mark.>> 

Would that it were not so. 

<<And as an aside, Moses was not allowed in the Promised Land because he misrepresented God before the people when striking the rock rather than speaking to it. Of course he was not perfect, but to imply imperfection kept one out of the Promised Land would imply then that Joshua and the thousands who entered were perfect...that makes NO sense of course.>> 

It is important that when someone like Moses sins, it is named, and named clearly. Yet we do not hear God calling Moses on the carpet for misrepresenting his words in the matter of divorce, perhaps some people think God sleeps on the Job, but I don't.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Hamilton109   2/2/2002 3:53 pm  
To:  Rtartan   (77 of 87)  
 
  238.77 in reply to 238.74  
 
WOW!! 
Tough word of warning but I pray he hears it!
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  TigerRaj   2/3/2002 9:40 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (78 of 87)  
 
  238.78 in reply to 238.30  
 
"If you come to God, and your spouse doesn't; then you can divorce if the unbelieving spouse agrees!" 
---------- 
Where is that in Scripture?
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  TigerRaj   2/3/2002 9:55 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (79 of 87)  
 
  238.79 in reply to 238.39  
 
AID's is a disease of homosexuality which is an abomination to God. There will be only one cure for it, and that is the abandonment of homosexual activity! 
---------- 
And what of other STDs? You know, syphliss, gonorehha, et. al. Were those spread by homosexuals as well? No. Are AIDs and homosexuals seemingly any more of an abomination to God than other forms of sexuality and perversenss? 

And what of "straight" people who have AIDs? Will the abandonment of homosexuality stop the spread of AIDs among them? 

"When a moral person is confronted with contempt, immorality, disloyalty, or dishonesty, he is so repulsed by the offense that he turns away and in despair closes his heart to the offender. But the miracle of the redemptive reality of God is that the worst and the vilest offender can never exhaust the depths of His love. Paul did not say that God separated him to show what a wonderful man He could make of him, but to reveal His Son in me  (Galatians 1:16). --Oswald Chambers 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  TigerRaj   2/3/2002 10:06 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (80 of 87)  
 
  238.80 in reply to 238.63  
 
The Bible is the only "Truth"! Anything else has no meaning, nor bearing as far as God's Word is concerned! 
---------- 
Then I can consider all that you say to have "no meaning, nor bearing as far as God's Word is concerned!" [grin]
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  Jim (pentitent)    2/4/2002 5:35 pm  
To:  TigerRaj   (81 of 87)  
 
  238.81 in reply to 238.78  
 
1 Corinthians 7:10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. 12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15  But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 
Verse 15 states what you asked! 


May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    2/4/2002 5:47 pm  
To:  TigerRaj   (82 of 87)  
 
  238.82 in reply to 238.79  
 
<<<And what of other STDs? You know, syphliss, gonorehha, et. al. Were those spread by homosexuals as well? No. Are AIDs and homosexuals seemingly any more of an abomination to God than other forms of sexuality and perversenss?>>> 
All STD's are spread through everyone that's unlucky enough to contract them. They are all equally abominable to God. 

<<<And what of "straight" people who have AIDs? Will the abandonment of homosexuality stop the spread of AIDs among them?>>> 

With as much ignorance that exists in this world, it's not probable. There is nothing wrong with showing the love of God to all; but we are to withdraw from those who reject Christ. To continue in a homosexual relationship is to reject God. One must choose to either follow the humanist secular laws and embrace the Homosexual and his lifestyle, or live for God and continue preaching against the depravity and eventual destruction that arises from it. We can not live for both.

May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    2/4/2002 5:48 pm  
To:  TigerRaj   (83 of 87)  
 
  238.83 in reply to 238.80  
 
I don't expect anyone to believe anything I say, unless it's back up by God's Holy Scripture.
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  TigerRaj   2/5/2002 3:49 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (84 of 87)  
 
  238.84 in reply to 238.81  
 
OK, thank you. I just wanted to be sure I understood what you were saying. At first I thought you were saying that if you were married to an unbeliever, you could initiate divorce. But you were saying that if you are married to an unbeliever and *they* initiate divorce proceedings, then it's OK to agree to a divorce. Correct? 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  TigerRaj   2/5/2002 3:58 pm  
To:  Jim (pentitent)    (85 of 87)  
 
  238.85 in reply to 238.82  
 
"All STD's are spread through everyone that's unlucky enough to contract them. They are all equally abominable to God."
----------
Ah, good. You're not singling out homosexuals, per se. Correct? 

"To continue in a homosexual relationship is to reject God."
----------

Would you agree that the nature of sin is amoral? That is to say that one can live a sinful life regardless of how moral or immoral their lifestyle may be or not be? That the nature of sin is to reject God, in any way, shape or form? 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Jim (pentitent)    2/5/2002 5:31 pm  
To:  TigerRaj   (86 of 87)  
 
  238.86 in reply to 238.84  
 
Yes.
May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  Jim (pentitent)    2/5/2002 5:45 pm  
To:  TigerRaj   (87 of 87)  
 
  238.87 in reply to 238.85  
 
<<<Correct?>>> 
Yes. 

<<<That is to say that one can live a sinful life regardless of how moral or immoral their lifestyle may be or not be? That the nature of sin is to reject God, in any way, shape or form?>>> 

Except for the life of Jesus, there is no such thing as a sinless life on this earth. So yes, I imagine that is it in a nutshell. The wages of sin are death. To reject God is death. To accept God is to follow His Word; which when faithful, will cut the instances and severity of sin in your life to a bare minimum. There are some sins that are unavoidable. But forgiveness is there for those who continue to strive for God and His righteousness till the end. In the end, no matter how you sin, for those who do it willfully, this is rejection of God and His Word.

May God bless and keep you, my brothers and sisters! 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
