The Design of Marriage

[DaPastor]

Hello all,

I would really like to contribute to this site and to exchange ideas, thoughts, and biblical understanding with other, like-minded Christians. I posted a couple of things here and hardly anyone has responded. As I read through all the topics it seems all anyone wants to talk about is the legal aspects, finding spouses, living arrangements.

Does anyone out there want to dig deeper into the Word of God with me?

In His service and yours,
David in Bulgaria

Hello David,

There are many things to discuss, that is for sure. Remember, ths site is very new and there are many things yet to do (to include the possibility of having a "going deeper" section or "debate section". People are only beginning to respond, so I understand why some posts are not being responded to either quickly or at all. As far as "digging deeper" is concerned, many of us love to do that. The only thing we are trying to avoid (although we may have a special section for that in the future) is making this a mere "debate forum". I have found that there is a big difference between "searching together" the Word and debating to prove presuppositional positions. If you want to dig deeper, we can certainly do that. If what we are discussing moves into the debate arena, then we can take that off the forum and debate through the email. Our heart is to ensure that those who need to be loved, cared for and equipped, not be confused by the details of minute points. With that said, choose a topic.

 

[DavidinBulgaria]

Randy,

No!! I didn't have debate in my mind at all. I have been in some aspect of ministry for almost 30 years (military, campus, local, missionary). The one thing I've seen so much of is shallowness in regards to the Word of God. I have visited congregations where I sat in on Bible studies conducted by the "elders" of the church. The class would go something like this, "Ok, let's look at the next verse. What do you think it means?" Often some little old man or woman would respond with something like, "Well brother, it says what it means and means what it says." The teacher would reply, "Amen, next verse?"

This is an extreme example but none-the-less true. More commonly a Bible class teacher will just ask, "What do you think the verse means?" and the class heads off on 15 or 20 minutes of opinion.

I just want to be involved with a group of people who truly want to study WHAT God said. I'm not involved in a poly lifestyle, although I truly believe it is within the will of God. I lost a wife of 34 years (she left me) because I dared to believe and teach that some of the patriarchs of old were righteously polygynous.

I believe there is much in God's Word that we have read over but have never truly "heard." I would just like to dig into these things with like-minded seakers of the truth of God's Word. I'm not interested in converting the converted. I am not looking for a fight. I am not trying to build a following.

In His service and yours,
David in Bulgaria

 

[DaPastor]

Randy,

No!! I didn't have debate in my mind at all. I have been in some aspect of ministry for almost 30 years (military, campus, local, missionary). The one thing I've seen so much of is shallowness in regards to the Word of God. I have visited congregations where I sat in on Bible studies conducted by the "elders" of the church. The class would go something like this, "Ok, let's look at the next verse. What do you think it means?" Often some little old man or woman would respond with something like, "Well brother, it says what it means and means what it says." The teacher would reply, "Amen, next verse?"

This is an extreme example but none-the-less true. More commonly a Bible class teacher will just ask, "What do you think the verse means?" and the class heads off on 15 or 20 minutes of opinion.

I just want to be involved with a group of people who truly want to study WHAT God said. I'm not involved in a poly lifestyle, although I truly believe it is within the will of God. I lost a wife of 34 years (she left me) because I dared to believe and teach that some of the patriarchs of old were righteously polygynous.

I believe there is much in God's Word that we have read over but have never truly "heard." I would just like to dig into these things with like-minded seakers of the truth of God's Word. I'm not interested in converting the converted. I am not looking for a fight. I am not trying to build a following.

In His service and yours,
David in Bulgaria

David,

I am with you. I have known many pastors, chaplains and Christian leaders over the years that seem to take the Word of God casually. I love to study and discuss the Word. I have been saddened by "fellowship time" with believers who were not interested in discussing God's Word but discussing everything but God's Word. In fact, my views have changed over the years as a result of challenging my own doctrinal positions to see if what I believed was truly worth believing (i.e. Scriptural). There are so many things that need re-examined, researched, and squarely faced in the Scriptures - sometimes it challenges us to our very core! However, if we are mature enough to grapple with the issues God will reveal His treasures to us. Reminds me of that Scripture:

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

-Proverbs 25:2

Perhaps we should take our place as His "kings" and "search out" those things He has concealed.

 

[Chaplain]

Brothers David and Randy,
I, too, wish to dig more into the Word for I too have had to back up and re-examine some things that I thought were right ( for I was instructed to believe so from a child ). The pastor at the Church I attend now, is trying to do such a thing but with the whole Church. He is going back from Genesis and is working through the OT and showing us things that I knew was there but had never really taken the time to be aware of it's meaning or it's significance to things of today, if that make any sense. Because of his knowledge of Hebrew, he has shown us some things that are better explained from the Hebrew than from English and how the meaning of things really change. So, yes, I would like to do so and will add to the discussion as much as I can.

 

[DaPastor]

Brothers David and Randy,
I, too, wish to dig more into the Word for I too have had to back up and re-examine some things that I thought were right ( for I was instructed to believe so from a child ). The pastor at the Church I attend now, is trying to do such a thing but with the whole Church. He is going back from Genesis and is working through the OT and showing us things that I knew was there but had never really taken the time to be aware of it's meaning or it's significance to things of today, if that make any sense. Because of his knowledge of Hebrew, he has shown us some things that are better explained from the Hebrew than from English and how the meaning of things really change. So, yes, I would like to do so and will add to the discussion as much as I can.

Dave,

For now, why don't you bring up a topic under "Other Biblical Issues" that we can "search out" together. Let us not go into too many directions. I am sure we are all very busy. However, if we can begin with a general topic, then we can go from there. If we need to narrow it done some because the topic is too big, we can discuss that too. I am sure if we remain teachable and allow the Word to be our final authority, we will all benefit.

 

[pastor]

pastor here
David I would like to do some digging into the word myself. Lately the more I study the more I realize I no nothing about god's word. So I even have a topic. Can a Pastor, Evangelist,teacher,prophet or even a apostle, (ephesians 4:11) have more then one wife? The more I study the more I am unsure. Can get both answers depending on what I want it to say. And I would love to have a real answer.

 

[DaPastor]

pastor here
David I would like to do some digging into the word myself. Lately the more I study the more I realize I no nothing about god's word. So I even have a topic. Can a Pastor, Evangelist,teacher,prophet or even a apostle, (ephesians 4:11) have more then one wife? The more I study the more I am unsure. Can get both answers depending on what I want it to say. And I would love to have a real answer.

Hello,

Ok... well, let us start with this topic then.. and move it to the other section I already mentioned. I will start it.

 

[Mark C]

...Can get both answers depending on what I want it to say.

This line encapsulates the real heart of the matter, particularly with respect to the well-known apparently 'anti-polygyny' verses in Timothy and Titus concerning 'overseers', 'deacons', or whatever the OTHER part of the translation may say.

The translators of the English versions which render the Greek "mia" wife as "one wife" instead of the equally-grammatically-correct "a wife" or "first wife" clearly knew what THEY wanted it to say. This has become a place to which I point when looking to cite an example of a culturally-biased translation and associated assumptions.

Any understanding of what Paul intended simply CANNOT be made from the text alone, but must be made in terms of context, and especially necessarily from a Torah-literate (which Shaul/Paul most assuredly was) perspective. It should not be forgotten, as well, that this was also a man who (speaking clearly for himself, and not God) specifically advised celibacy for some!

Bottom line for me is that I think he was saying such a man should be the "husband of a first wife", meaning that such a man should be --

1) married - indicating that he has the skills, wisdom, and experience to head a household and cover his wife (or wives)...

2) STILL married (to his first wife) - indicating that he has not "put her away", for the obvious and Biblically-myriad reasons.

(And I think that it would be as incorrect to arbitrarily exclude widowers from such offices based on an overly-legalistic interpretation of those verses as I would the upstanding patriarchal heads-of-house! )

Much more could be said, but the above is consistent with the Bible (as the apostles knew it!) and the specific teachings of the Savior. It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that the only real arguments for the more traditional Romanized teaching of "monogamy-only for deacons" is the "tradition" of the "Church" which - as Yeshua warned the Pharisees, AND those who would later emulate them :?: - has so often been allowed to replace the "commandments of God".

 

[DaPastor]

...Can get both answers depending on what I want it to say.

This line encapsulates the real heart of the matter, particularly with respect to the well-known apparently 'anti-polygyny' verses in Timothy and Titus concerning 'overseers', 'deacons', or whatever the OTHER part of the translation may say.

The translators of the English versions which render the Greek "mia" wife as "one wife" instead of the equally-grammatically-correct "a wife" or "first wife" clearly knew what THEY wanted it to say. This has become a place to which I point when looking to cite an example of a culturally-biased translation and associated assumptions.

Any understanding of what Paul intended simply CANNOT be made from the text alone, but must be made in terms of context, and especially necessarily from a Torah-literate (which Shaul/Paul most assuredly was) perspective. It should not be forgotten, as well, that this was also a man who (speaking clearly for himself, and not God) specifically advised celibacy for some!

Bottom line for me is that I think he was saying such a man should be the "husband of a first wife", meaning that such a man should be --

1) married - indicating that he has the skills, wisdom, and experience to head a household and cover his wife (or wives)...

2) STILL married (to his first wife) - indicating that he has not "put her away", for the obvious and Biblically-myriad reasons.

(And I think that it would be as incorrect to arbitrarily exclude widowers from such offices based on an overly-legalistic interpretation of those verses as I would the upstanding patriarchal heads-of-house! )

Much more could be said, but the above is consistent with the Bible (as the apostles knew it!) and the specific teachings of the Savior. It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that the only real arguments for the more traditional Romanized teaching of "monogamy-only for deacons" is the "tradition" of the "Church" which - as Yeshua warned the Pharisees, AND those who would later emulate them :?: - has so often been allowed to replace the "commandments of God".

Thanks for your reply Mark... I am going to place a copy of this on the other section so we can continue this discussion.