• 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.

"chained wife"?

One of the good things about BF is that we can agree to disagree. We are brothers and sisters in
Christ. Some of us are more sensitive in discussing certain theological disagreements, but,,,,
We all must be aware of the people who are reading it and we really do not need to be name-calling
or dissension within the ranks.
written in love, dede ;)
 
"typical Judaizer/Pharisee"

It is probably me that you are referring to...and at the time the comment fit (and likely still does so it is good that you changed your signature) as that was partially what the discussion was about...the things that were being said and done are the things that were being said and done by the Judaizers and the Pharisees in the first century and beyond. Whether they are being said or done today or 2000 years ago makes no difference...and I gave the scripture verses to show that it was not my opinion, it was statements made by the Apostles and disciples. Some of Paul's harshest criticism was toward the Judaizers and Pharisees...I wouldn't take that lightly.

Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.

I'm not replying out of anger...just wanted to set the record straight...
 
i am so glad that you approve.
even though you are speaking complete nonsense.

steve, the judaizing pharisee
 
There is a significant, distinct difference between Judiaizers/Pharisees and Jewish people that are Messianic. I think it is significant that we keep that difference in mind. The main foundation of the difference is how Christ Jesus, the Messiah is treated. Yes, I do see the redundancy of terms used above.
 
Hi Steve,

I certainly do not claim to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but the unasked question behind your orginal post has had my considerable small amount of grey matter on overdrive (read: the hamster is stuck on the spinning wheel :lol: :lol: ).

Please help me understand your original post.

Suzanne the dumb blonde :oops:
 
Indeed Pastor John!

Evangelical Messianics or Original Messianics are those who rightly embrace the Lordship (i.e. Jesus is God in the flesh) of Christ and yet still affirm the right and option of real Jews (or anyone else) to keep the Jewish heritage and culture even while being in the body of Christ.

False Messianics or Non-Evangelical Messianics or merely Judaic legalists who sometimes use the term Messianic are those who affirm in word/theory the truth of the whole Bible but deny its substance as they deny the substance of Christ being God in the flesh. Often if not always they demand that every person must obey the entire OC law code.

Having studied under over 7 theologians who were Messianic in seminary I can testify to the differences among the various Messianic groups yet even so, the two key issues that make up the largest difference have been: (1) Is Jesus Christ truly Lord (God in the flesh), and (2) does one have to obey the entire OC law in order to be rightly related to the Lord.

Dr. Steven Ger, Dr. Goldberg, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Dr. Barry Levanthal, Dr. Charles Feinberg, Dr. Paul Feinberg, and Dr. John Feinberg (all Jews who also believe in Jesus Christ) have addressed this issue for many many years about the corruption that has crept into the various so-called Messianic assemblies. What started out as a godly Evangelical movement designed to evangelize Jews into Christ and mature them into the Messiah was and still is under severe attack by Judaizers who distort the truth about Christ and about salvation. Satan, the god of this age (2: Cor. 4:4), has blinded the minds of unbelievers so that they might not see the gospel and in that effort he has in particular focused on derailing the original Messianic movement by inserting into that movement false ideas about both Christ and salvation. As he does with any group trying to focus on the gospel he undermines it with all of his might. In his efforts the nature of Christ and the nature of grace are always his first point of attacks.

In this case today we are left with many who are using the name Messianic but in reality deny the substance of who Christ is and also reject the doctrine of salvation by grace alone for the non-evangelical view that one must "keep the entire OC Torah" to be rightly related to God.

Granted many of these are moral people. They remind me of Cornelius in Acts 10. They often seek to do right and they desire to be moral people. But those failing to embrace the gospel lack the Spirit and thus are still enslaved to a different religion.

This is dangerous for families because many fine, honorable, godly, and evangelically based believers desire to maintain the Jewish customs (which can be done righteously), not for salvation or sanctification, but then when they meet these non-evangelical so-called Messianics they either get confused, derailed, or stunted in their growth in grace as they become enslaved to an ideology that is devoid of both true Christ and the gospel.

Many women are even deluded and ruined by men claiming to be Messianic yet in reality are enemies of the gospel of grace. Thus when they are lured in, especially into a union with such a man who becomes their head, they are enslaved not to Christ Jesus as Lord but rather to legalism and to a different faith that is lacking in the true substance of Christ as Lord.

When Christ Jesus is re-defined to something other than God in the flesh the entire spiritual organism is flawed and no matter what name one attaches to it, Messianic, Presbyterian, Protestant, Baptist, Pentecostal, Methodist, Anglican, etc. etc. such a position is the antithesis of the Lord and his gospel of grace. Anyone, woman, man, boy, or girl who aligns with such a message that redefines who is Christ is a "chained person," i.e. one chained to an unbiblical idea and to the yoke of Judaism. Judeo-Christianity affirms the Lordship of Jesus and the gospel of salvation and sanctification in grace. It is there where one can build on the rock and disciple a family in the ways of the Messiah.
 
Scarecrow, what do you mean about my signature. I am a blond incognito and tech illiterate,
so I have no idea what you are talking about. This is Mo.nurse (dede) :?:
 
:) I was talking about Steve's "signature" line. It goes back to another post where I tried to show him (and others) that what they were saying was no different than some of the things that the Judaisers were saying/doing and the Pharisees were saying/doing. Christ fulfilled the law, and while that did not remove the law (or there would be no sin) we are not under the law anymore. The Judaisers and Pharisees both used circumcision (keeping the law) as a requirement to be either a Christian (in the case of the Judaizers), or a Jew (as in the case of the Pharisees). These religions that teach Jesus + whatever we decide to add = salvation are indeed putting God to the test as Peter aptly points out.

Peter made it very clear they were wrong:

Acts 15:1-10 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question. So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the brothers. When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses." The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?

Thus my comment about Steve's new (and accurate) signature line.
 
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
False Messianics or Non-Evangelical Messianics or merely Judaic legalists who sometimes use the term Messianic are those who affirm in word/theory the truth of the whole Bible but deny its substance as they deny the substance of Christ being God in the flesh. Often if not always they demand that every person must obey the entire OC law code.

This is dangerous for families because many fine, honorable, godly, and evangelically based believers desire to maintain the Jewish customs (which can be done righteously), not for salvation or sanctification, but then when they meet these non-evangelical so-called Messianics they either get confused, derailed, or stunted in their growth in grace as they become enslaved to an ideology that is devoid of both true Christ and the gospel.

Two very good points. Many Messianics have actually redefined the term to fit their own religious definition of God. It is sadly a 'feel good' way to be anti-christ without a negative connotation.

Your second point is one not often thought about. Abruptly, family members are asked to forget the name of Christ and abandon a faith based relationship to God in deference to an observance relationship to God. A Christian home changes to a captive audience where hidden behind the term Patriach a leading away from Christ is initiated.
Probably the easiest way to reveal an anti-christ spirit is to attempt to share Christ for 15 minutes. If a person has nothing to say about Christ then obviously they are not Christians. Some will even admit this and do not want to be called Christian.
And please do not fatigue me with the argument that the term is not "Christ" but "yeshua". I am easy. I do not have a problem with "yeshua" In fact I do not have a problem with Jesus Christ as follows.

Jesus Christ in:

Arabic يسوع المسيح
Russian Иисус Христос
Japanese イエスキリスト
Hindi जीसस क्राइस्ट
Spanish Jesús Cristo

There are many more. You know, the son of God who died on the cross, shed his blood so that many might be redeemed. And then resurrected in victory over death and our deserved condemnation. And what were we condemned for, well for starters not being able to fulfill the Law
 
blugrniz4u said:
Hi Steve,

I certainly do not claim to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but the unasked question behind your orginal post has had my considerable small amount of grey matter on overdrive (read: the hamster is stuck on the spinning wheel :lol: :lol: ).

Please help me understand your original post.

Suzanne the dumb blonde :oops:
i just find it interesting to consider what might davids "achilles heel" have been. what was the "open door" through which an otherwise moral man was brought down?
the idea that the enemy came to him with the possible question of "hath YHWH said that she is surely uriah's woman while she holds in her hands a "get" (divorce) from him?"
not at all that the "get" in any way excuses him, it just might make it a little easier to understand the slippery slope that he failed upon. again, he was a very moral man who had no pattern of failure outside of this one, which makes it all the more mind-boggling. :)

steve, the judaizing pharisee (not really, it just seems to make my antagonists happy :D )
 
You know, the son of God who died on the cross, shed his blood so that many might be redeemed. And then resurrected in victory over death and our deserved condemnation. And what were we condemned for, well for starters not being able to fulfill the Law
i am in full agreement.
the law just shows us how much we need the salvation offered to us by Yeshua, Jesus, Christ, Messiah, call the son of YHWH whatever you like.
it is only an evil taskmaster and an impossible yoke when we try to be saved by it (and that was exactly what the judaizers were teaching).

but i still sign "steve, the judaizing pharisee" to make the super-righteous happy
 
Ahemm! That is ULTRA righteous if you care! Hmmmph!
 
i am in full agreement.

Really? So you believe Jesus Christ as the Son of God is truly God who has been born in the flesh to die and redeem lost sinners? Welltan's point and substance (definition) to his term Jesus Christ is that Christ is God in the flesh.

Or feel free to post on Pastor John's thread on this since the topic is more in line with that other thread.
 
i agree with EXACTLY what welltan wrote. not with what you are trying to read into it.

steve, the judaizing pharisee
 
[Peter made it very clear they were wrong[quote}

My bible says in Galatians 2 that when Peter went to Antioch, PAUL withstood him to his face because he was to be blamed (read: Peter was being a hypocrite).

One of my favorite lines from Paul is Galatians 5:25-26 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.
 
"The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them..."

Peter didn't just blurt it out randomly. There had been considerable discussion among "The apostles and the elders..."
 
My belief is that David's "open door" was that David made a couple of stupid decisions (haven't we all??) that placed him in the "wrong place, wrong time" scenario.

Let me explain MY reasoning (remember i'm blonde :D )

2 Sam 11:1-3 Kings go to war in springtime, but David sent his top lieutenent and his servants instead. David is restless in the palace and goes prowling on the roof where he sees a hot babe taking a bath. Everyone in Jerusalem knows who the hot babe is and her husband EXCEPT David.

Still with me?? As I see it, David evaded his responsibility as king. Spring is wartime, NOT hanging around the palace time. David allowed LUST to grow in his heart. David concentrated on his pleasures, NOT on his responsibility before God and country (no, i have never been a U.S. Marine :lol: ).

FYI, Psalm 51 is David's prayer of repentance after being called out by the prophet Nathan.

Suzanne the dumb blonde (still)
 
"Still with me??"

ummm...no...in fact now I am feeling a little blonde...I have no idea how we went from Peter sticking his foot in his mouth to David committing adultery. I also think it is extremely speculative that David didn't know she was Uriah's wife.
 
My reasoning about David's "open door" is in answer to the OP, Steve.

I will concede that perhaps David DID know who the hot babe belonged to, however the palace servants did their darndest in trying to REMIND David of the fact that she was NOT available.
 
i completely agree that the first mistake that we are aware of davids was in not going to war with his men.
maybe he just was not in the mood for war? :)
he evidently WAS in the mood for love. ;)

as far as not knowing who the chic was, i do not see any evidence to support the idea. not that it is not possible, he might not have. but we cannot operate under that assumption.

steve, the judaizing pharisee

btw: you aint no dumb blond, so stop claiming it already. :D
 
Back
Top