At least he was willing to admit his wrong, but did he change his response?
-
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.
BibFam gets the shoutout... from the pulpit! 😂😂
- Thread starter PeteR
- Start date
Baby steps...he did not come around, but I left him with the challenge to search the Scriptures. He had thrown this "Everybody else believes that you are wrong" in my face, so I told him how Martin Luther had stood up to the church, and oh by the way, he and his theolgians (I mentioned Philip Melencthon) stood with me. He was unaware that Martin Luther stole his wife from a convent! It was a great conversation, but I don't want to post the details. That would completely derail this thread. He and his wife are great friends of ours, and if I posted the entirety of our conversation, he wouldn't look so good. I will instead post bits and pieces, for instructive purposes, so you may form a Mosaic.
I would like it if there were a Study on the book of Genesis that we could use to bring people into the fold. It would be awesome to invite men from the church to this Bible study where their eyes could be opened to the truth, gradually. Of course the church already offers its own men's Bible study, so we could just call our little group, "an accountability group".
See there! I just posted two random thoughts that we could start new threads on, well at least one of them.
Last edited:
I had another thought about God giving the wives into David's bosom. I have to wonder if the good pastor Joel would be OK, with men lying in bed with a woman whom they are not married to, so long as they don't have sexual relations with that woman. After all, God gave women into David's bosom, and he understands this to mean that the women can lie with the man and not have sexual relations with him, as was the case with Abishag.
The problem with this argument that David Didn't have sex with Saul's wives is that it is redefining marriage beyond the definitive act, and turning marriage into more like a servant role. He providing food, clothing and shelter in exchange for whatever service she provides in the home. Man's law tries sometimes to follow biblical law. If a man and woman marry, but after a time have not consummated the marriage, a divorce is not required. They get an annulment. Now with the wives David left at home when he fled from Absolom it says that he put them away and they lived in widowhood after they were had by Absolom. David no longer went unto them. So if any of those had been Saul's ...and David had never had sex with them, this change would be meaningless for them and it wouldn't have been recorded.
I don't have time to dig that out....but really, I am so tired of people trying to shoehorn scripture into their monogamy only false doctrine. My sis in law once accused me of "Really reaching" when I pointed out how Ruth was blessed. "Be fruitful like Rachel and Leah who together did build the house of Jacob" to me indicates Boaz was not a wealthy Batchelor or even Widower. If he didn't have former wife they could have said be fruitful like Rebecca. Her family told her "Go and be the mother of hundreds of millions....and she did it with one set of twins!
Who was really reaching was HER fior thinking that Boaz, being a kinsman Redeemer had to be single....in a nation that grew from one man and his four wives!
Last edited:
I am not sure I follow what you are saying, and if you are saying what I think you are saying, I am not sure I agree with it, and even if I did agree with it, trying to use that as a persuasive argument, is what I would term "A Bridge too Far".
To put it very bluntly, I think people who are uncomfortable with the thought of God giving David his master's wives to have sex with, are exhibiting redidual faulty thinking that goes contrary to creation and PROcreation. They might be unaware that their discomfort is because of a long ago departure from the Biblical mindset....knostics, then the church at Rome, then continuing down through protestant churches too, but it is just as much a departure from true faith and obedience to the creator.
So they try to redefine marriage to them being "friends?" "Roommates?"
Or like I said before more like the women being a servant in the home.....because they think (or feel) it would be wrong for the new king to marry the dead king's wives.
Oh, O.K. I think my X wife expressed the conclusion perhaps some may have. I'd never been married. I was 18. I was before and have always been plagued with way too much need for sex. Then I married this girl who said to me on our wedding night... "Oh, Please NO. I don't want us to think that the reason we got married was for sex." Frankly, if I had realized that attitude would carry on throughout our marriage I would have settled the issue that night by calling off the whole marriage. Oh how I wish I had. Because that expectation also went for every day of the rest of our lives together. So, here is one man that EXPECTS lots of sex if I ever am able to find wives. I am a good man. I treat women well. But I have this expectation that may be unpopular. Is that evil of me?
OK, well even if we were to grant Pastor Joel that it may only be for the purposes of lying in bed with the wives of Saul without having sex with them, which is how it was used in 1 Kings, I am pretty sure he would STILL be uncomfortable with even that notion.
Goodness! She obviously didn't take Paul seriously when he wrote in 1 Cor 7:5 that we are not to defraud one another. I found it interesting that Pastor Joel conveniently ignored that verse. It kind of undermines the point he was trying to make in verse 4.
In ALL other respects she obeyed the Word, and loves the Lord. She has a blind spot as large as the earth in this one area and all the preaching/teaching/arguing/pleading/begging/slobbering - had no effect on her. She gave in once or twice a week to avoid all the hassle but it was giving in, it was not for the joy of the moment. Had it not been for my concubines, I would think it was me. But no, thank God - it is not me. It was/is her. It was so unfair of her to not let her feelings be known before the marriage. And because of my beliefs at that time, I thought it would be wrong to divorce her so until 8 or 10 years ago we were still hitched. Finally SHE DIVORCED ME - providing me the opportunity to marry another. But I haven't - I don't even know how to find a wife. I don't know how I found her - but I do know whatever I did then, I DID IT WRONG.!
What about commanding?
Or taking her.
You can command a person who recognizes they are submissive. She never saw a submissive day in her life. My proper action at the very beginning, and later and later and later yet, at any time should have been divorcing her for I certainly had every right. But that old teaching, that it was wrong to divorce still hung with me. That I had ever right to divorce her really never took hold of me because though she did not respect me, I respected her and her feelings. And no - I would never "take" anyone. If a man cannot have willing women in his life I believe he is better to suffer than to force. I would NEVER do that.
Just raise her up, push against law, tell her she is adorable and you can't resist her. Then give her light kiss.
I bet she would melt inside.
Being desired is for our pschology is what is for body. It's irreplacable and it's lack means soul death.
I thought it was comical that he would try to use the story of David and Abishag to say that “into your bosom” doesn’t mean sexual relations. It obviously does because the narrator of 1 Kings found it necessary to clarify that although she was literally laying in his bosom, as the phrase seems to indicate, David didn’t have sexual relations with her. Everyone would assume that David had sex with Abishag because that’s what into your bosom would indicate, unless otherwise specified. That kind of defeats his whole point.
Nope - never could happen. She always assumed if I got within arms length of her that I wanted sex (which of course I always did) but that was not the reason I was getting close to her. Anything I offered to help with she took as me being subtle and working around to sex. Her mother had taught her that sex was always wrong except for when we wanted to get pregnant. She loved sex during two very short periods in our life together. Nine months before we had each of our two children. Unfortunately I was too fertile and got her pregnant immediately.
Your relationship was doomed to fail because it was FUBARed. By both.
You incapable of any physical contact without sex and her only pregnancy sex.
Sometimes it seems like you are trying to see how insulting you can be and get away with it. What you are accomplishing is showing how little you really understand.
@PastorLarry I apologize for the insensitivity being displayed here.
You cannot divorce her unless she goes out and has relations with another dude. If you believe the man is better off suffering than to force, I am not sure why you would believe that, unless you have other wives that you can turn to.