• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

1 Timothy 4 "some shall depart from the faith" "Forbidding to marry" Blasphemy!

M

Mr.M

New Member
The BLASPHEMY of those who leave the faith by forbidding marriage.

1 Timothy 4
1 Now the Spirit speaketh evidently, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, and shall give heed unto spirits of error, and doctrines of devils,
2 Which speak lies through hypocrisy, and have their consciences burned with an hot iron,
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats which He hath created to be received with giving thanks of them which believe and know the truth.

The Spirit clearly says people who forbid marriage are leaving the faith by following "spirits of error, and doctrines of devils". The Son's line came through Bathsheba who was NOT David's 1st wife. According to the logic of those who forbid marriage, this would make Solomon (and his bloodline to the Son) illegitimate, which is BLASPHEMY!!!

Deuteronomy 23 2 “One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord.

We must exhort those who forbid marriage to return to the faith and repent for following "spirits of error, and doctrines of devils". They are forbidding over 1,100 Polygynist marriages in scripture by calling multiple wives sin.
 
Mr.M said:
The BLASPHEMY of those who leave the faith by forbidding marriage.

1 Timothy 4
1 Now the Spirit speaketh evidently, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, and shall give heed unto spirits of error, and doctrines of devils,
2 Which speak lies through hypocrisy, and have their consciences burned with an hot iron,
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats which He hath created to be received with giving thanks of them which believe and know the truth.

The Spirit clearly says people who forbid marriage are leaving the faith by following "spirits of error, and doctrines of devils". The Son's line came through Bathsheba who was NOT David's 1st wife. According to the logic of those who forbid marriage, this would make Solomon (and his bloodline to the Son) illegitimate, which is BLASPHEMY!!!

Deuteronomy 23 2 “One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord.

We must exhort those who forbid marriage to return to the faith and repent for following "spirits of error, and doctrines of devils". They are forbidding over 1,100 Polygynist marriages in scripture by calling multiple wives sin.
Click to expand...
It is a bit more nuanced though, and we have to be careful with this one, as David's relationship with Bathsheba was clearly condemned in Scripture. While we recognize that Joseph, the husband of Mary descended through Solomon, son of Bathsheba, we also recognize that according to Luke's genealogy, there is another line of descent, most likely through the Zelophahad precedent of marrying a woman who had no brothers. This line of descent came through another son of David, by the name of Nathan, which is not given who the mother is, but is likely to be one of David's wives for whom he was NOT condemned for taking. Joseph was not Jesus' biological father, but Mary was in fact His biological mother, so he did descend from David, but not necessarily though Bathsheba.
 
Daniel DeLuca said:
It is a bit more nuanced though, and we have to be careful with this one, as David's relationship with Bathsheba was clearly condemned in Scripture. While we recognize that Joseph, the husband of Mary descended through Solomon, son of Bathsheba, we also recognize that according to Luke's genealogy, there is another line of descent, most likely through the Zelophahad precedent of marrying a woman who had no brothers. This line of descent came through another son of David, by the name of Nathan, which is not given who the mother is, but is likely to be one of David's wives for whom he was NOT condemned for taking. Joseph was not Jesus' biological father, but Mary was in fact His biological mother, so he did descend from David, but not necessarily though Bathsheba.
Click to expand...
And with this understanding we see Jesus has full legal right to the throne of David through both Joseph and Mary.
 
Daniel DeLuca said:
They forbid them from reconciling with their husband. That is for sure!
Click to expand...
Have you noticed how very pro divorce the M-O crowd is? Yet Jesus speaks against divorce and upholds the indissolubility of marriage. Why do the M-O crowd not encourage women who believe their husbands are not obeying the word to be submissive to them and win them by their godly conduct? 1 Peter 3:1-6 deals specifically with such an issue, but again, I guess the truth of Scripture doesn't apply when women's emotions are involved.
 
frederick said:
Have you noticed how very pro divorce the M-O crowd is? Yet Jesus speaks against divorce and upholds the indissolubility of marriage. Why do the M-O crowd not encourage women who believe their husbands are not obeying the word to be submissive to them and win them by their godly conduct? 1 Peter 3:1-6 deals specifically with such an issue, but again, I guess the truth of Scripture doesn't apply when women's emotions are involved.
Click to expand...
I noticed! I was shocked and appalled when preachers that I had known for decades not only encouraged my wife to leave me but also claimed headship over her. They used 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 to justify it, "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife". It baffles me how you flip that around to promote divorce.
 
Gary Slaughenhaupt said:
I noticed! I was shocked and appalled when preachers that I had known for decades not only encouraged my wife to leave me but also claimed headship over her. They used 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 to justify it, "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife". It baffles me how you flip that around to promote divorce.
Click to expand...
I hope you have been able to find another church, and another wife FTM.
 
Gary Slaughenhaupt said:
I noticed! I was shocked and appalled when preachers that I had known for decades not only encouraged my wife to leave me but also claimed headship over her. They used 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 to justify it, "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife". It baffles me how you flip that around to promote divorce.
Click to expand...
Because it's about punishing you for "incorrect theology" and disobedience.
 
Mark C said:
'They' not only forbid polygyny, but too many forbid women with a 'get' from remarrying as well.
Click to expand...
Brother, please correct me if I'm wrong, but are you denying this scripture?

Luke 16
18 “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.

Matthew 5
32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except [a]sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

Matthew 19
4 And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’
5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
6 So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
7 They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”
8 He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

Mark 10
4 They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”
5 “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied.
6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’
7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,
8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh.
9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this.
11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.
12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
 
Daniel DeLuca said:
It is a bit more nuanced though, and we have to be careful with this one, as David's relationship with Bathsheba was clearly condemned in Scripture. While we recognize that Joseph, the husband of Mary descended through Solomon, son of Bathsheba, we also recognize that according to Luke's genealogy, there is another line of descent, most likely through the Zelophahad precedent of marrying a woman who had no brothers. This line of descent came through another son of David, by the name of Nathan, which is not given who the mother is, but is likely to be one of David's wives for whom he was NOT condemned for taking. Joseph was not Jesus' biological father, but Mary was in fact His biological mother, so he did descend from David, but not necessarily though Bathsheba.
Click to expand...
Unless your saying His bloodline descended from David's 1st wife Michal then my point stands. David's ADULTERY and MURDER of Uriah was sin. Once Bathsheba was a widow, her and David's marriage was honorable. This is why the child of adultery was killed and Solomon who was concieved post marriage lived. Solomon and His bloodline to the Son are legitimate.

Hebrews 13
4 Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
 
Mr.M said:
Brother, please correct me if I'm wrong, but are you denying this scripture?
Click to expand...
No, what I am "denying" is that those mis-translations even ARE actual "Scripture." They are misleading, deceptive, and downright false.

And here is why: [Edit: Emphasis added ]

Mr.M said:
Luke 16
18 “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.

Matthew 5
32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except [a]sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.
...
Click to expand...
In ALL of those cases there are multiple errors, and the use of literally the wrong word. What Yahushua actually said, quoting Himself as the Author of His Word, all of it, including particularly Deuteronomy 24:1-3, is that "whoever puts away his wife..."

The Hebrew word is transliterated "shalach," and means to literally put away, or send away, or send out. The first such use is with Adam and Eve who were "sent out" of the Garden for a similar reason - rebellion.

To "put away" is without question, undeniably, NOT the same as the English word "divorce," and the proof is the process, which INCLUDES "putting away," but requires more, from that twice-repeated mandate in Deuteronomy 24:1 and then again v3.

As it turns out, the terrible degree of those errors has been a frequent topic on BF. And one aspect, which offends some "church dogma," is now essentially verbotten to even discuss here any more. (Very sadly.)

Suffice it to say, the simplest proof of the radical error is the Word of the Savior Yahushua Himself: He said He was not changing so much as "one yod or tiddle" (not the tiniest bit) of His Instruction, and so, since He is not a liar, He did NOT. (And Matthew 5:32 is only a dozen verses later besides!)

If you find a lousy rendering that implies He DID change what He said He WOULDN'T - guess who is at fault?

PS> It should be obvious, but just in case: A woman who is only "put away," but does NOT have a 'certificate of divorce,' is still MARRIED. She still has a "living husband." THAT is why a man who 'put her away,' but without that written certificate, in fact "CAUSETH HER to commit adultery." The rest will become clear as you see the other errors, and note what is consistent. His Word, as Written, ALWAYS is.
 
Last edited:
PS> @Mr.M --

Now I'm curious: What translation was it that you were quoting? It's honestly the most consistently bad on that topic that I have ever seen.

Even the King James gets it right about half the time (although in Matthew 5:32, they translate the same word DIFFERENTLY in the very same verse!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top