Off-gridinwv
New Member
Then why were they said to be living in widowhood, and because David went not in unto them they lived in widowhood till they died2sam.20:3
Once time again, I have read the verses, just not recently. If you have something I’ve missed I’d love to see it. I was gobsmacked by the Malachi passage. I have proven time and again that I can be persuaded. But I have to be persuaded. No one gets a courtesy agreement.For someone who’s proud to have not read the verses in question, you sure are confident. I’d be embarrassed to stand so staunchly on such a foundation.
You evidently don't understand my question or your avoiding it. The act of marrying a woman put away is adultery and the only way it could be adultery is if marriage=sex. Got it?If you're referring to Jesus talking about divorce, which I assume you are... "divorce" is part of the problem with the translations. We read "divorce" and assume it means what we think divorce does, a full on legal and spiritual severing of the marriage. But it doesn't have to be translated as divorce. It can just as easily be "send away".
"but I say to you that everyone who divorces (sends away) his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced (her that is sent away) woman commits adultery."
It seems feasible to me what Jesus is really saying here is that anyone who sends away their wives for anything other than sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery with the man she will end up joining to.
And whoever marries "her that is sent away", meaning sent away for anything but adultery/sexual immorality, commits adultery because she is still actually bound to her husband.
Given the amount of frivolous "sending away" that seems to have been happening, you'd be in a society just riddled with adultery due to improper divorcing and wife swapping.
I’d not heard that you had read those verses. Great! And I’m glad you’re open to an alternative. I’ll happily share once I’ve had time to finish my paper.Once time again, I have read the verses, just not recently. If you have something I’ve missed I’d love to see it. I was gobsmacked by the Malachi passage. I have proven time and again that I can be persuaded. But I have to be persuaded. No one gets a courtesy agreement.
I disagree as I believe every “marriage” constitutes a covenantal relationship according to the scriptural definition. (Which is not necessarily a contract or written thing).And once again, there are no verses about forming a marriage that have a covenant in them. None. Not one. There should be at least one.
You evidently don't understand my question or your avoiding it. The act of marrying a woman put away is adultery and the only way it could be adultery is if marriage=sex. Got it?
I have explained this."Marrying a divorced woman" Could just as easily be unpacked as the act of taking in, having sex with, and altogether "taking her as your own" a woman with who belongs to another man (married) who has been sent away, even with a GET that was for "burnt toast" and thus not a valid reason for divorce, would be "marrying" or uniting or taking to yourself a married woman, so he and she would be committing adultery.
Then why were they said to be living in widowhood, and because David went not in unto them they lived in widowhood till they died2sam.20:3
I have explained this.
What will you do with the allowance of divorce by Moses?
Yeshuah said that Moses allowed for divorce.Can you be more specific?
Have you never heard of marrying another man's wife? Question 2: God doesn't join every marriage together. Do you think Jer.5:7-8 supports that they brought the harlots home and claimed ownership of them,when the text says they were neighing after their neighbors wife in the harlot's houses. Do you think Hos.2:1-7 supports your twisted confused theology where a whorish woman goes after her lovers and decides to return to her FIRST husband. Have ye not read where the marital status of a woman is determined by whether or not she's a virgin. Lev.21:3; Luke 3:36; 1Cor.7:34. I'm done with you sir. I've done give a heretik way more time than I should have (Titus3:9-10) good day.That's like saying that the only way I could be an American is because I live in Texas and so the only way anyone can be an American is by living in Texas.
Marriage doesn't have to mean "sex" and only "sex". When you take that position and then try to fit the Bible to it, you end up with the inconsistencies you still have yet to address:
If sex results in marriage, even with a married woman, then why was Bathsheba still Uriah's wife when David had sex with her? Why did Uriah need to die in order for David to actually have her as his wife? You still haven't addressed this hole in your theory.
"Marrying a divorced woman" Could just as easily be unpacked as the act of taking in, having sex with, and altogether "taking her as your own" a woman with who belongs to another man (married) who has been sent away, even with a GET that was for "burnt toast" and thus not a valid reason for divorce, would be "marrying" or uniting or taking to yourself a married woman, so he and she would be committing adultery.
"For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh."
This is a multi part process no matter how you try to slice it, if it was as simple as sex the Hebrew language fully supports Gen 2 saying:
"for this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, take a woman and go into her, and she shall be his wife."
The one flesh business is mentioned 1 time in the OT that I can find and then again when Jesus went back to it. All throughout the OT beyond that where is the mention of one flesh in all the text regarding marriages and sex? There are many references to bone and flesh, or what we understand as "my family" ... but where are all the other "one flesh" mentions when directly discussing sexual acts, or adultery, and so on... if one-flesh = sex and marriage?
When Jesus went back to it He added:
"So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no person is to separate.”
Is God joining together a harlot and a man when they have one-night only sex? If it's sexual immorality, how can God be credited as the joiner of those two in an immoral act?
I genuinely want to understand the one-flesh statement, and what makes up an actual God-joined marriage, and what makes adultery, and proper divorce. I just don't think from what I've seen that the idea that sex=marriage alone stands up to any scrutiny.
Aaaand there’s the pride. Shame on you.I'm done with you sir. I've done give a heretik way more time than I should have (Titus3:9-10) good day.
Yeshuah said that Moses allowed for divorce.
How do you reconcile that with your seeming belief that divorce isn’t allowed?
H
Have you never heard of marrying another man's wife? Question 2: God doesn't join every marriage together. Do you think Jer.5:7-8 supports that they brought the harlots home and claimed ownership of them,when the text says they were neighing after their neighbors wife in the harlot's houses. Do you think Hos.2:1-7 supports your twisted confused theology where a whorish woman goes after her lovers and decides to return to her FIRST husband. Have ye not read where the marital status of a woman is determined by whether or not she's a virgin. Lev.21:3; Luke 3:36; 1Cor.7:34. I'm done with you sir. I've done give a heretik way more time than I should have (Titus3:9-10) good day.
Sex with a married woman is adultery. That’s laid out in scripture. I’m sure how this would relate to the forming of the marriage. It’s the destruction of the marriage. Sex with a man formed it, sex with another man destroyed it. Seems simple enough.That's like saying that the only way I could be an American is because I live in Texas and so the only way anyone can be an American is by living in Texas.
Marriage doesn't have to mean "sex" and only "sex". When you take that position and then try to fit the Bible to it, you end up with the inconsistencies you still have yet to address:
If sex results in marriage, even with a married woman, then why was Bathsheba still Uriah's wife when David had sex with her? Why did Uriah need to die in order for David to actually have her as his wife? You still haven't addressed this hole in your theory.
"Marrying a divorced woman" Could just as easily be unpacked as the act of taking in, having sex with, and altogether "taking her as your own" a woman with who belongs to another man (married) who has been sent away, even with a GET that was for "burnt toast" and thus not a valid reason for divorce, would be "marrying" or uniting or taking to yourself a married woman, so he and she would be committing adultery.
"For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh."
This is a multi part process no matter how you try to slice it, if the one flesh bit was as simple as sex the Hebrew language fully supports Gen 2 saying:
"for this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, take a woman and go into her, and she is his wife."
The one flesh business is mentioned 1 time in the OT that I can find and then again when Jesus went back to it. All throughout the OT beyond that where is the mention of one flesh in all the text regarding marriages and sex? There are many references to bone and flesh, or what we understand as "my family" ... but where are all the other "one flesh" mentions when directly discussing sexual acts, or adultery, and so on... if one-flesh = sex and marriage?
When Jesus went back to it He added:
"So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no person is to separate.”
Is God joining together a harlot and a man when they have one-night only sex? If it's sexual immorality, how can God be credited as the joiner of those two in an immoral act?
I genuinely want to understand the one-flesh statement, and what makes up an actual God-joined marriage, and what makes adultery, and proper divorce. I just don't think from what I've seen that the idea that sex=marriage alone stands up to any scrutiny.
Does sex with another man automatically destroy the marriage? Or is it just a permissible reason to divorce?Sex with a married woman is adultery. That’s laid out in scripture. I’m sure how this would relate to the forming of the marriage. It’s the destruction of the marriage. Sex with a man formed it, sex with another man destroyed it. Seems simple enough.