Does a husbands authority wax and wane?

[Cap]

Because I’m asking what a singing anointing is, and asking where this process and teaching is laid out in scripture, you think I’m not filled with the Holy Spirit?

Phillip after the encounter with the eunuch has already been dismissed. Then there is 1 Kings 18:46 The power of the LORD came on Elijah and, tucking his cloak into his belt, he ran ahead of Ahab all the way to Jezreel. , and Samson, and all the healing of Paul and then Apostles, let alone the actions under the Holy Spirit the Son of God performed. Oh, and there is 2 Samuel 6:14 Wearing a linen ephod, David was dancing before the LORD with all his might, which by the way Michal reacted most have not be normal. (She didn't believe in the workings of the Holy Spirit either.)None of these actions I have provided can be 'explained' from the Word of God, BUT they are there.

To explain things like a 'singing' anointing one has to have an understanding of the way the Holy Spirit works, it's something someone has to see to believe. I'm asking do you believe the Holy Spirit can work beyond a definition in the bible?

 

[Phillip]

Because I’m asking what a singing anointing is, and asking where this process and teaching is laid out in scripture, you think I’m not filled with the Holy Spirit?

In answer to your question, the question is yours to answer. Here is sample scriptures to aid in your answer.

1. Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let everyone of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:38)
2. “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.” (Matthew 3:11)
3. “I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” (Mark 1:8)

When we are grafted (might be a bad choice of verbiage) into Gods family when we repent and ask Jesus to be our Lord and Savior, it comes with the deal of the Holy Spirit in our lives. My observations tho, is that many Christians would rather make decisions with their minds than by asking God to show them. In all honesty, it’s easier sometimes to hear your own thoughts than to hear from the Holy Spirit. However just like excercise, it gets easier the more you do it.

As far as do you have the Holy Spirit in your life? Just go thru those three quick scriptures and you’ll know for yourself.

PS There’s more scripture on the same topic

 

[Jim an Apostle]

What is a singing anointing? How does one obtain such a thing? Can you give an example of one in scripture, or do you just mean that someone is skilled in singing?

I Sam. 16: 23And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.

II Kings 3 15But now bring me a minstrel. And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the LORD came upon him.

I believe these are two examples of a musician/singer having a special anointing to play/sing. Skill is good and helps but I have heard less skilled singers who at times blessed me and brought an awareness of the presence of the Holy Spirit more than those with skill alone. This anointing would ultimately be a gift. Almost any anointing can be sought and to some degree received through study prayer and mentorship. Bible schools train people to become pastors who are sometimes very sincere and who become proficient in that work but who may not actually be "called." We are told to seek the best gifts. There is no substitute for a sovereign gift from God. Ultimately gifts are given as He wills. The greatest manifestation of a gift usually comes when a "gift" is combined with ardent pursuit as to its use. We are to stir up (pursue) the gifts we are given and not bury our talents. There are gifts/anointings listed in scripture but God can anoint with a permanent or temporary anointing any endeavor He chooses. Saul prophesied under a temporary anointing (he was not called to be a Prophet. Balaam's donkey spoke with a temporary anointing/gift. In general though, gifts and callings are to be permanent. Solomon's wisdom remained even when he sinned. Many musicians have been gifted by God, then took their "gift" to use for their own glory or profit. To use one's gift for personal gain is not in itself wrong, IF the use of it 'to bring glory to God' is not neglected in the process.

 

[steve]

I Sam. 16: 23And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.

II Kings 3 15But now bring me a minstrel. And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the LORD came upon him.

I believe these are two examples of a musician/singer having a special anointing to play/sing. Skill is good and helps but I have heard less skilled singers who at times blessed me and brought an awareness of the presence of the Holy Spirit more than those with skill alone. This anointing would ultimately be a gift. Almost any anointing can be sought and to some degree received through study prayer and mentorship. Bible schools train people to become pastors who are sometimes very sincere and who become proficient in that work but who may not actually be "called." We are told to seek the best gifts. There is no substitute for a sovereign gift from God. Ultimately gifts are given as He wills. The greatest manifestation of a gift usually comes when a "gift" is combined with ardent pursuit as to its use. We are to stir up (pursue) the gifts we are given and not bury our talents. There are gifts/anointings listed in scripture but God can anoint with a permanent or temporary anointing any endeavor He chooses. Saul prophesied under a temporary anointing (he was not called to be a Prophet. Balaam's donkey spoke with a temporary anointing/gift. In general though, gifts and callings are to be permanent. Solomon's wisdom remained even when he sinned. Many musicians have been gifted by God, then took their "gift" to use for their own glory or profit. To use one's gift for personal gain is not in itself wrong, IF the use of it 'to bring glory to God' is not neglected in the process.

Nicely done

 

[Cap]

I think both @Phillip and @Jim an Apostle did an excellent job.

 

[The Revolting Man]

To my knowledge God didn’t write anything we have in print. I could be wrong about that but I think everything we have was written by someone besides God. Even Christ didn’t write anything we have in print.

Apparently very learned Jews wrote the Talmud from Babylon. Which is why it’s called the Babylonian Talmud, not because it was written by Babylonians.

The BT is a series of commentary about Torah from the Jews who actually lived the culture, in which they explain much about the culture and Torah that could be otherwise open to creative interpretation by those unfamiliar with the culture.

For example, your interpretation of the passage restricts it solely to slaves as your Zec commentary / interpretation above shows.

Both interpretations are commentary.

So which commentary would carry the most weight? A commentary by men considered by their culture to be the experts on understanding Torah, or would the most accurate commentary be the one given by someone who could care less about Jewish culture.

Not meaning to be harsh but it’s a fair question

Here we go again. The commentary that carries the most weight is the one that sticks closest to the text. In this case the Zec commentary is far superior to the Babylonian one. And God did write the Bible, just because His pens had names and faces doesn't obscure that point.
Let's not do this again. Let's leave it at this, I am convinced that you have a disturbing habit of editing scripture on the authority of questionable sources. You are convinced of something about me that I'm entirely sure of but it makes sense to you and means that there is a lot of knowledge left out of the Bible that has to be added back in. Everyone knows how this goes from here. I just popped in with that so others reading this thread later will hear the alternative and not fall back in to the age old trap of letting the traditions of men make null the Word of God. I know I'm not going to convince you.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I'm not claiming to be an expert on this one but... one understanding I always had was that the commands God gave regarding how to treat slaves, was the bare minimum applicable to how we should treat everyone. If we are going to treat anyone differently it should be to increase their rights and not reduce them. Why would this instance be any different? Free wives would be given those same rights to provision from her husband and rights to divorce him for neglecting her...

Not trying to argue this is a legit question... And it has some very real world implications for someone I care about ...

Because of what wives represent, the submission due Christ. Just because we don't think God is taking care of us well enough doesn't mean we can go find a new god. There have been a lot of believers who have been very poorly provided for by our standards.

 

[The Revolting Man]

To my knowledge God didn’t write anything we have in print. I could be wrong about that but I think everything we have was written by someone besides God. Even Christ didn’t write anything we have in print.

Apparently very learned Jews wrote the Talmud from Babylon. Which is why it’s called the Babylonian Talmud, not because it was written by Babylonians.

The BT is a series of commentary about Torah from the Jews who actually lived the culture, in which they explain much about the culture and Torah that could be otherwise open to creative interpretation by those unfamiliar with the culture.

For example, your interpretation of the passage restricts it solely to slaves as your Zec commentary / interpretation above shows.

Both interpretations are commentary.

So which commentary would carry the most weight? A commentary by men considered by their culture to be the experts on understanding Torah, or would the most accurate commentary be the one given by someone who could care less about Jewish culture.

Not meaning to be harsh but it’s a fair question

I just want to look up the "Babylonian Talmud" and lo and behold it's just the plain, regular old Talmud that was compiled after A.D. 70 by non-believing Jews to try and reform the faith after the destruction of the Second Temple. These were not God fearing, Old Testament Hebrews living Torah. These were the remnants of the Pharisees who were trying to keep Christianity at bay decades after the Crucifixion.

Nothing the Talmud says should ever be used to re-interpret the Bible. The Talmudic Rabbis were creating an alternative to the Torah. It may have some value but it is not to be used to add to the Bible.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Who gets to decide which passages are considered inspired by God?

For the record, I do not consider Jewish commentary to be inspired, rather a historical record and in the case of the BT, a historical legal record. It’s literally the equivalent of someone 2300 years from now, examining the Federalist papers to better understand the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution.

As to the second part of your statement, you really should educate yourself further into which traditions the Pharisees created. The Babylonian Talmud predates the Pharisees by hundreds of years and is the oldest record I’m aware of outside of the Bible of Jewish culture from Jewish sources. In fact, I do not recall any place in the BT that would qualify as something Christ corrected in the Scriptures. I am also not a fan of the Pharisees or their attempts to edit scripture or their historical revisionism or any other method they used to attempt to disprove the divinity and import of Christ, however, an attempt to discredit the BT based upon a Pharisaical Bias is the height of folly as the Pharisees did most of their traditions about 300 years later and their anti - Christ revisionism about 5-600 years later.

This is NOT true! The Babylonian Talmud is the regular old Talmud, which was compiled for 70 A.D. through the 5th century. It was compiled by the remnants of the Pharisees.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Who gets to decide which passages are considered inspired by God?

For the record, I do not consider Jewish commentary to be inspired, rather a historical record and in the case of the BT, a historical legal record. It’s literally the equivalent of someone 2300 years from now, examining the Federalist papers to better understand the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution.

As to the second part of your statement, you really should educate yourself further into which traditions the Pharisees created. The Babylonian Talmud predates the Pharisees by hundreds of years and is the oldest record I’m aware of outside of the Bible of Jewish culture from Jewish sources. In fact, I do not recall any place in the BT that would qualify as something Christ corrected in the Scriptures. I am also not a fan of the Pharisees or their attempts to edit scripture or their historical revisionism or any other method they used to attempt to disprove the divinity and import of Christ, however, an attempt to discredit the BT based upon a Pharisaical Bias is the height of folly as the Pharisees did most of their traditions about 300 years later and their anti - Christ revisionism about 5-600 years later.

@rustywest4 , @Joleneakamama , @Mage Hi guys, I have a lot of respect for you Rusty and while I frequently butt heads with you Jolene I have never doubted your intellectual rigor. Mage I have like many of your posts and I have been impressed by you. But all three of you liked this statement by @Verifyveritas76 and I don't think you did enough research before you did. The Talmud wasn't even started until 40 years after Christ's death. It was allegedly based on "oral tradition" but given what we know about the Jew's superb use of the written word we can pretty much discount that claim. If it wasn't written down before A.D. 70 it didn't exist in the Jewish culture. And it certainly wasn't the product of the Old Testament Hebrews living in the captivity as the frequent use of the phrase "Babylonian Talmud" would imply. Here there by dragons folks and I hope you'll be careful.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I think that too much is being made of the last phrase, the go free part.
I would propose that the same YHWH who hates divorce also hates the starving out of the first wife when a man adds another.
You can dance around the parsing of Scripture all day long and argue over interpretation, but starving a woman is abuse and I would never stand in the way of a woman leaving if she is in ACTUAL abuse.
“He has me on a diet that she isn’t required to follow” doesn’t qualify.

This isn't what anyone is really saying. Again anytime we talk about whether a woman can leave her husband it's assumed that we mean with the freedom to remarry. Obviously she is allowed to leave for any reason as long as she doesn't remarry.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I don't think so. I think its much the same as the high standard we have in court for getting a conviction. Yes it allows some guilty parties to get away, but it prevents a far greater number of innocents from being caught up. And if she leaves she's going to have to provide for herself anyway. So she's working for her food one way or another. Far better to stick around and by her example (1 Peter 3) bring him to Christ (1 Cor 7).

But as Paul said, if she does leave then remain single or go back to him. Few will too strenuously object to her avoiding starvation. But if she then goes on to start sleeping around, tries to get another husband, etc; she's got a problem.

But really, we're probably talking about a one in a million situation here. The problem by saying it is ok in some extreme example is everyone then goes on to deceive themselves that they too fit the example even when to outside observers they obviously do not. And most of the church today lacks the backbone to contradict any women seeking divorce. To the women who truly wants to serve God and is facing starvation: God will provide, through the church or by other means. People don't sit idly by while a child of God goes wanting.

I heard angel choruses singing the Hallelujah Chorus' Hallelujah Chorus while I read this.

 

[The Revolting Man]

When you have to rent a uhaul to rescue a couple who has been living in her non-running car in the dead of winter, starving but yet he reeks of alcohol.
I could go on, but please tell me all about his rights as a husband.

Here we go again though, his actions don't affect her actions. It's not about his rights. It's about her calling. We're called to death if need be. I know it rankles but our feelings can not be allowed to interpret Scripture. Scripture has to speak for itself. Women are strong enough to suffer for Christ too.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Your stance would pervert judgement for the victim in the hope of preserving marriages through manipulation rather than truth.

It seems like the baby is being thrown out with the bath water. Our job is not to build fences like the Pharisees but to judge accurately and righteously on each and every occasion.

Except that this "judgement for the victim" is based entirely on you ignoring a word you don't like. So instead of working God's Justice what we get is a working of your justice as you see fit. Remember what tempted Eve, to know right and wrong and so be like God? You're very close to doing the same thing. You can't declare sin. The Talmud, either Babylonian or Jerusalem, doesn't get to declare sin. God get's to declare sin. And he didn't declare non-providence a grounds for divorce with the possibility of remarriage unless a woman was bought as a slave from her father.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I Sam. 16: 23And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.

II Kings 3 15But now bring me a minstrel. And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the LORD came upon him.

I believe these are two examples of a musician/singer having a special anointing to play/sing. Skill is good and helps but I have heard less skilled singers who at times blessed me and brought an awareness of the presence of the Holy Spirit more than those with skill alone. This anointing would ultimately be a gift. Almost any anointing can be sought and to some degree received through study prayer and mentorship. Bible schools train people to become pastors who are sometimes very sincere and who become proficient in that work but who may not actually be "called." We are told to seek the best gifts. There is no substitute for a sovereign gift from God. Ultimately gifts are given as He wills. The greatest manifestation of a gift usually comes when a "gift" is combined with ardent pursuit as to its use. We are to stir up (pursue) the gifts we are given and not bury our talents. There are gifts/anointings listed in scripture but God can anoint with a permanent or temporary anointing any endeavor He chooses. Saul prophesied under a temporary anointing (he was not called to be a Prophet. Balaam's donkey spoke with a temporary anointing/gift. In general though, gifts and callings are to be permanent. Solomon's wisdom remained even when he sinned. Many musicians have been gifted by God, then took their "gift" to use for their own glory or profit. To use one's gift for personal gain is not in itself wrong, IF the use of it 'to bring glory to God' is not neglected in the process.

Since I'm on my way to post approval let me catch you in my net too, based on this verse Saul was the one anointed. Read the damn text. Was the anointing working against itself. It drives me crazy how many of you guys want to read the text plainly when it means you get to have sex with multiple women but suddenly get very complicated any other time.

 

[Asforme&myhouse]

Phillip after the encounter with the eunuch has already been dismissed. Then there is 1 Kings 18:46 The power of the LORD came on Elijah and, tucking his cloak into his belt, he ran ahead of Ahab all the way to Jezreel. , and Samson, and all the healing of Paul and then Apostles, let alone the actions under the Holy Spirit the Son of God performed. Oh, and there is 2 Samuel 6:14 Wearing a linen ephod, David was dancing before the LORD with all his might, which by the way Michal reacted most have not be normal. (She didn't believe in the workings of the Holy Spirit either.)None of these actions I have provided can be 'explained' from the Word of God, BUT they are there.

To explain things like a 'singing' anointing one has to have an understanding of the way the Holy Spirit works, it's something someone has to see to believe. I'm asking do you believe the Holy Spirit can work beyond a definition in the bible?

I believe The Holy Spirit does what scripture says he does. The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin, righteousness, and repentance, and he points us to Christ. I see a gigantic leap in logic in your post. Yes, God preformed tremendous signs and wonders in the Old Testament and the new. How you made the leap from that to “singing anointing” without some secret extra biblical knowledge, has me fascinated. It seems like some type of gnostic teaching. Miraculous signs and wonders appear in scripture at key places and seem to be there to authenticate sections of scripture as it was being written, as being the very Word of God.

This whole thing about “anointings” has me a bit skeptical, because Jesus said that many would claim to be cristos or, anointed ones. We are also warned to be on guard against false apostles and false prophets. We are told there will be MANY. When I look around, the only people i see claiming to be prophets of God, Apostles of God, and anointed ones are in the Charismatic Movement. Can you explain why this is?

One thing you said forces me to ask, do you believe that Jesus performed miracles, signs, and wonders by the power of The Holy Spirit or by his own power as God in human flesh?

@Jim an Apostle the term anointing does not appear in those verses and the only way it gets there is by you asserting that that is what it is pertaining to.

 

[Pacman]

Because of what wives represent, the submission due Christ. Just because we don't think God is taking care of us well enough doesn't mean we can go find a new god. There have been a lot of believers who have been very poorly provided for by our standards.

What constitutes the husband divorcing the wife? And if he does and she isn’t at fault is she then free to remarry?

1 Corinthians 7:15
[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.

Is he an unbeliever who departed? The situation I’m talking about is a man who has completely neglected her and the children. Not living with them and providing absolutely nothing...

 

[FollowingHim]

This is NOT true! The Babylonian Talmud is the regular old Talmud, which was compiled for 70 A.D. through the 5th century. It was compiled by the remnants of the Pharisees.

As far as I can see, @ZecAustin is correct. The sources I have looked at state that the Babylonian Talmud was compiled around 500AD, and the documents it contains were written over the previous 2-300 years, making the oldest content no older than 200AD. It is not an ancient document telling us how pre-Christ Jews interpreted Torah, but one telling us how post-Christ Jews, those who had rejected Messiah, interpreted Torah. There may no doubt be some content that is of interest, but it does not have the antiquity claimed by @Verifyveritas76, and is very much a Pharisaical writing. Furthermore there are many Christians with much more serious concerns about its content, but I won't go there at this point as I am not informed in that area. I suspect that he may have just misunderstood the origin of the document - or possibly he can clarify and has further information on this text that we are not aware of?

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Just getting back on and saw this. I will recheck my sources on the BT and will edit if my info on antiquity is incorrect.

 

[Phillip]

When I look around, the only people i see claiming to be prophets of God, Apostles of God, and anointed ones are in the Charismatic Movement. Can you explain why this is?

Start with the scripture;

Ephesians 4:
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the me

I’ll only go over one of these offices. That will help. An apostle is a pastors pastor. Even pastors need a nurturerer, a guide, someone they can trust to talk about things. In the Southern Baptist’s for example, my hometown pastor became the president of the Missouri convention. He would advise, guide and counsel the other pastors as they built their churches. He was a pastors pastor. The Baptist’s don’t call them an apostle, but my pastor filled the biblical office of apostle without being called that. Welcome to 21st century church. New names for old offices. Probably why many of us have been drawn to this site. Get back to original intent.

As for charismatics, they are currently using the Bible referenced names. The other four offices are still being used as well. Maybe these offices are not being used with power and might, but that’s where the annointing comes in. In the area of music, King Johosephat sent the worshippers (singers) ahead of the armies and sang and worshipped at the front of the battle. That’s a reference to me of anointed worship/singing. You can use whatever verbiage you want, I call it anointed and that term is acceptable to a whole gob of people. There are many references of using music/singing throughout scripture. They left singing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Ephesians 5:19.

I drive a car, an automobile, a GMC, a Yukon etc. you can call it by many names, but it’s my personal transport. It gets me where I’m going.