Wayfarer Pilgrim wrote: I think we have an incredible difficult path ahead, some folks will vote, some will opt out. Either way, I'm afraid we could be under marshal law in two years, and not because of the upcoming election but that the current president has made us unsafe and it might have allowed our nation to suffer grievously. Not from terrorism but from an attack from Russia with a sea launched nuke from the Gulf of Mexico. The Russians have been doing mock missle drills for 3 years from the gulf and it the pentagon have been working on a plan, but, the Russians tried this in 1968 off Hawaii, but their sub sank. Both current candidates are not saying anything on how to deal Russia. One wants us to get along and let Europe suffer and the other has a bad heart and had a blood clot pass thru her brain 5 years ago. Pray hard folks.
I have my own thoughts of what may be in store for us but it is certain that Obama has weakened this nation significantly and Trump aims to turn that around in a hurry. If it looks like Trump will win the general election, I expect one of our enemies (probably not ISIS) will give serious thought to strike either us or a close ME ally like Israel before he takes office. Potentially perilous times ahead.
John UK wrote: Bro, in Rev 20:12, it is clear that there is one book (the Lamb's Book of Life) and there are books (out of which the world is judged). Now in the Bible (one book) we have the moral law and all other laws of God. There would be no need for books (plural) to contain that.
So as to not lose the plot..... you asked: "Now if unbelievers cannot marry, neither can they commit adultery, nor be held accountable for divorce nor remarriage. If God's laws will not come into account at the Day of Judgment, how will he judge them?"
We have a narrative from Jesus about judgment day in Matthew 25:31-46. Those separated on Jesus's left hand, cast away into everlasting punishment...... how did they address Jesus in their feeble defense?
Again, Matthew 7:21-23 they say...... "Lord, Lord." They are goats..... tares (pretend Christians similar to "not all Israel is Israel") sown in amongst the wheat but only the wheat will be raised up into God's barn and the tares will be gathered and burned. This and more is contextually relevant to the judgment of Rev 20 and without it we are only guessing.
I gave Rev 20:15 in answer to your question because:
Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law.
Kev wrote: Oh, ok I guess I see but this site goes against dispensation principles set forth against John 4 J's ideas not for the idea.
Because there are dear brothers, and maybe sisters, who post regularly on this site, who hold to dispensationalism; I'm not going to get involved in a downhill discussion on dispensationalism except to point out what you may already know.
Dispensationalism begins with a rigidly literal interpretation of the OT. The problems begin when that OT interpretation is carried forward into the NT writings..... they won't reconcile. An example is the OT clearly teaches that the promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were based on genetics and ethnicity. So in the NT age, the ethnic Jews who now inhabit the nation/state Israel are said to be God's people and will be saved at some mass conversion and that because they inhabit the literal Promised Land. But what of all their genetic forefathers who perished in unbelief these past 2,000 years? Did they not have the same blood line..... DNA?
In the NT, there are 2 classes of people...... Children of the flesh and children of promise. Nothing to do with genetics. Everything to do with Abraham's seed who was Christ.
John UK wrote: Good morning bro, and Lord bless your ponderings. It is a wonderful thing to be in the Lamb's Book of Life, looking forward to the eternal joy. But for those not there, it seems there is a record of sins, hence... Revelation 20:12 KJV (12) And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
May yours be blessed as well.
Remember the discussion a few months back about the "books" at judgment? It is my view, right or wrong, that these books are not an accounting of individual sins of all mankind but the measure of God's righteous moral law (not my choice of words but used here as most understand it as the Decalogue and Levitical laws). There is no need for a book of accounting of individual sins as God sees the hearts of those He judges. It is the yardstick of measure that is opened on judgment day which imputes sin and makes the world guilty before God. Rom 3:20, 5:13
That said, the moral law is part and parcel of the Sinai covenant given to God's people. What of the Hindu, atheist, etc. who is not in covenant with God?
John UK wrote: Lurker Bro, 1) I am fairly settled, considering this is something I've never heard of before. However, I shall bear your remarks in mind and ponder them. 2) But I do see difficulties in your thinking. For example, the law is the means of the Spirit to convict of sin. Now if unbelievers cannot marry, neither can they commit adultery, nor be held accountable for divorce nor remarriage. If God's laws will not come into account at the Day of Judgment, how will he judge them?
Fair enough. Actually, I'm not settled on it either..... never gave it serious thought till this discussion. But, when I began to ponder it, running the idea through all the OT writings in my mind, I couldn't find any conflicts. Nothing but support but it may be a good while before I consider it settled.
2) Judgment day will not be about all the sins the unregenerate have accumulated.
And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. (Rev 20:15)
John for JESUS wrote: If I was wrong like you are, I wouldn't be yawning. I would want to listen to God's word. If Romans 11 isn't speaking about the nation of Israel and the physical descendants of Abraham according to the promise, then it makes no sense!
The "physical" descendants of Abraham was Hagar's seed. Gal 4:28-31.
Your faulty view creates a class of people that doesn't exist in the bible. There are children of promise and children of the flesh (Ishmael, Esau & progeny)....... Romans 9:8.
John for JESUS wrote: Lurker... Oh really, Israel is the church?! So God divorced His church because His church rejected Jesus? The church has killed the prophets? The church hasn't obtained what it was looking for? God has given the church a spirit of slumber? The church was broken off because of a lack of faith? Salvation has come to the Gentiles, but when the fullness of the Gentiles comes in then the church will believe?! Concerning the gospel, the church is an enemy? The church does now not believe? Israel is not the church! You might have to read that chapter again, lol.
Acts 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:
Church (ekklesia: feminine gender, hence either married to or betrothed to God) means assembly of believers regardless of NT or OT.
John for JESUS wrote: Lurker... Read Rms 11. Do you think Israel is really the church?
Rom 11 must be interpreted in light of the relevant prophets and there are many. To interpret it stand alone leads to folly and error as you demonstrate.
Is Israel the church as in the bride of Christ? Of course. All that belonged to the Father was given to the Son to redeem in time. The church is the body of Christ and the members are called from both the Jews and Gentiles.
Hos 2:18-19 And in that day will I make a covenant for them (Israel) with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of heaven, and with the creeping things of the ground (figurative for Gentiles)... And I will betroth thee unto me for ever; yea, I will betroth thee unto me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in lovingkindness, and in mercies.
It is the Son speaking here.... not God the Father. This is self evident as the bride (Jew and Gentile church) is to be wed to the Lamb who was slain from the founding of the world (kingdom of God) of which Abraham was heir (Rom 4:13).
As for me, I number myself with the multitudes of Rev 7:9-17 and Abraham, not Jacob, is my father and Sarah my mother (Rom 4:16, Gal 4:26)...... a child of promise as Isaac was (Gal 4:28).
John UK wrote: Genesis 2:24 KJV (24) Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. Lurker, is not this an ordinance of God, from the beginning, and applicable in Genesis and beyond initially to Adam and Eve, and to all their children, and to all their children? Not all were godly, but marriage was common to all.
Yes, an ordinance of God from the beginning with Adam and Eve being the first couple...... a son and daughter of God. (Don't want to forget the relationship with God of the first couple.) But the rest you assume.
JB shamed Herod for having his brother's wife. Apart from that, you'll be hard pressed to find any mention where God spoke against pagans, heathens, etc. for their marital practices good or bad. But the OT is full of God's warnings to His covenant people for putting away their God fearing wives of youth and marrying the daughters of strange gods.
This view is likely strange to you and I understand if you can't accept it. But from my perspective, I can't reconcile God joining unbelievers as one flesh..... a living soul. Unbelievers are dead souls until quickened.
John for JESUS wrote: penned... If only they would! Some in fact do. However, God says they won't all turn until later.
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: Romans 11:25â€-â€¬29 KJV
"as it is written...."
Ever looked up the prophet? When the Deliverer, or Redeemer as it is written by the prophet, comes...... wait for it, J4J.... as a thief in the night ushering in the final day of the Lord, the resurrection of the just and unjust and the judgment seat of Christ. The day of salvation will have passed followed by tribulation, great tribulation and the resurrection. There will be no mass salvation of Jews. Whoever has heard the gospel of their salvation and believed shall be saved, enter into eternal rest and the rest shall be damned.
Isaiah 59:20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, **and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob**
And those who have not turned from transgression... "Depart from me."
Unprofitable Servant wrote: I hope you realize that less than a handful of any who are involved in this discussion actually drink any alcoholic beverages. We just don't unjustly condemn those who drink in moderation or try to twist the Scriptures to fit our viewpoint. No one is condoning drunkenness and all the evils associated with it. We agree with the church that removed the pastor from his position for not repenting of his sin. We just hope by the grace of God to rightly divide the Word of Truth and to uphold our brothers and sisters in Christ who are being maligned through faulty logic and sanctimonious opinions which do not line up with the teachings of the Bible. What you are seeing is a love for the Scripture and a love for our brethren, not a defense of abusing alcohol.
John UK wrote: Lurker/Saint James, At market I regularly talk with a middle aged unbeliever who lives with his girlfriend and they have a daughter. I have told him that he is "living in sin" and ought to be married. Should I now apologise to him and tell him that marriage is not for unbelievers, and he can do as he wants? What would God say about his state? Is he "sinning"?
Hey John....... I missed this one.
You should tell him what you believe to be true regardless of what anyone says. What God will say about it is yet to be known.
As for a biblical definition of marriage...... some things to consider:
Mark 10-7-9 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
1 Cor 6:15-16 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
Now if God forbids a God fearing man to be one flesh with a harlot, what suppose ye He'd say about 2 unbelievers?
John for JESUS wrote: He divorced her and never remarried.
And never will? Too bad for you.
Your futurist dispy error shines forth unmistakably.....
1 Pet 2:8-9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: **Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.**
Where do you suppose Peter got this wording? "were not a people".... "had not obtained mercy" BUT NOW (at the time Peter wrote the letter) "are the people of God" "have obtained mercy". He quoted from Hosea 1 & 2, J4J..... the very prophet you've been cherry picking to defend your perversion of scripture. Error added to error ad infinitum till there is no chance of you ever seeing the truth yet you are convinced you've got it right and everyone else is wrong. Pity.
John for JESUS wrote: Kev... Jesus closed up any loopholes alright! The Pharisees believed they could get divorced for any reason and then marry someone else. Jesus said it is unlawful according to God's law to divorce and if anyone marries someone else, they are guilty of adultery. Nowhere in His statements does Jesus permit adultery!
You have a significant problem with this, J4J.
God did exactly what you say His law prohibits His people from doing. He gave Israel and Judah a bill of divorcement for being unfaithful and took another wife from among the Gentiles.
John UK wrote: If Lurker Bro is tuning in, maybe he would also like to contribute to the definition.
When I have a work project (as I do now) I usually have a few minutes in the AM to read comments. In the evening, I catch up by reading from where I left off in the morning till I'm current.
When I saw your comment I had it in mind to assert what I've asserted before..... that is; biblical marriage is a God ordained, life long covenant between a God fearing man and a God fearing woman.
As I continued, I came to brother James's comment and thought to myself..... YES!! Thank you James for your input....
Eph 5:21-25 Submitting yourselves one to another **in the fear of God**. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church... Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.
We have here the shadow as well as that which casts the shadow and both must be in harmony. So, I say what I've said before. God does not join atheists, Hindus, RCs, etc. in marriage.
Divorce was meant to put away unbelieving wives so the repentant, believing man is free to marry or remarry a believing wife.
John UK wrote: Lurker, I read those passages, and it is very exciting. I do wish I'd spent more time studying the OT.
Glad to hear it, John. I trust you now see that a "wife of youth" is not just a hidden gem in Malachi but a biblical principle which is consistent throughout the OT. The marriage covenant instituted by God was, and still is, intended for God fearing men and women in covenant with God.
If one clearly sees this, it sets a precedent for divorce and remarriage beyond what J4J has in view. To biblically divorce someone, one must first be biblically married to someone which was the point of my comment about the RCC never performing a biblical marriage..... ever.
Anyway, I have definite views on that subject too but I think I'll keep them to myself for now. Brother Observer has been handling that quite well so no need for me to add to the mix.
Kev wrote: What if two divorced unbelievers come together get married then come to Christ and are born again. Are they to seek divorce or stay together? Would this verse apply? 1 Corinthians 7:20â€“27
Verses 20-24 pertains to circumcision (Jews under law) and uncircumcision (Gentiles under grace). Apart from that, I agree with Observer and John.
Kev wrote: If you transpose wife of youth on Timothy text there is room for holes. Windowing and etc.. Therefore make this text not applicable for Timothy as we all know widows can be remarried. This would not be then wife of youth. But you are right there are many good points that can be taken out of Malachi.I Like this chat with all I learn much from you guys. This is a friendly chat Lurker and I hope I am not making you mad as I love chatting with my fellow brothers about the things of the Lord.
Kev, Good discussion and no, I don't get mad easily but then I'm not a "chatter" either. I take these discussion dead seriously.
One point for you and John to ponder. Malachi says "wife of youth". When other scripture is taken in, it becomes clear what was meant was a God fearing wife from within Israel's own tribes. What it clearly doesn't mean is the first woman a man of God marries which could be an unbeliever.
Apply that principle to us in the Christian age.
OK, I've got to go.... I'll look in tonight.
Btw, when this discussion is taken in light of the news article..... it makes the pope look as stupid as he really in. The RCC has never performed a biblical marriage....... ever!
John UK wrote: What were these "church leaders" doing? They were ministering to the Lord whilst committing adultery and being unfaithful to their wives, and then grumbling that the Lord wasn't blessing them. Wow!
Excellent! You're getting the good stuff out of Malachi and how similar falling away by pastors and elders may be one of the reasons God has withheld His blessings.
Now, some related scripture. Have a read of the last 2 chapters of Judges where all Israel fought against Benjamin till they finally put away their strange wives.
And then some progression forward from Malachi 2:
Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me. (John Baptist is the messenger)
Mal 4:6 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: (Elijah is a figure of JB but the timeline of just before the day of the Lord)
Now, fast forward in time to the commencing of the day of the Lord in a later age:
I don't have space to post it all so I'd ask you to read it at Zechariah 12:10-14. What Zechariah is speaking of is the elect of the tribes of Jacob putting away their strange wives.
With this you can see a common theme which God takes very seriously.
I don't rely on commentaries for my understanding. After all, how are you going to know who is right and who is wrong unless you know the scriptures yourself. Besides, the text in question is self explanatory if you don't impose any pre-conceived assumptions on it. That said, all 3 commentaries agree with my interpretation.