Pam,

You didn't make me "feel" that you misrepresented me. You misrepresented me. However, I accept your apology.

This isn't about forming factions to strengthen our positions, it's about rightly dividing the scriptures.

Pam, I haven't come to any conclusions! Here's the complete sentence that you quoted just a part of. If you will read it and consider it's meaning then I think you will understand.

"I'm not saying that I think its a good idea for believers to marry unbelievers and I'm not saying scripture doesn't teach that it shouldn't be done, I just don't see any of the verses that you've referenced that say so." Let me state it another way, "I'm not saying scripture does teach that it shouldn't be done. I honestly don't know what scripture teaches. I was hoping to find out but you wresting the scriptures out of context is not going to lead to any answers to what they teach.

The changing of my mind was that of rejecting my previous application of an instruction from Paul to believing widows as a possible command to all believers. That is a stretch that I don't think is warranted.

We are in agreement on nothing. The closest we come is 1 Cor 7:39. You make it apply to all believers, I don't necessarily believe that. You make it necessary for a person to carefully map out the entire exchange which is time-consuming and tedious and wouldn't be necessary if you didn't bend and twist things.

There you go generalizing and twisting scripture again. Each passage that you have cited about separation has a different context, not some general application that you can use wherever you like.
Why should we address some speculation on your part? We could all speculate on anything we liked and all talk about it but how is that edifying? We're here to learn what God says, not what each of us says. So, find us a scripture that commands believers not to marry unbelievers and we'll discuss it.

Jennifer

George,
As per your instructions, I don't expect a reply to this...it would, no doubt, only be another defamatory rant anyway! However, I will address a few things that you neglected to mention...First, though, I would like to point out that I am NOT the one who took this thread off topic...unless I'm mistaken, it happened in posts #20, 34, 35, and 40; I didn't chime in on this new subject (saved/lost marriage) until #62. I don't recall you fussing on any other posters for changing the subject - I'm only mentioning this to demonstrate that you were just (like I said before) purposefully being inflammatory.

In my post #72, I clarified one of my points and gave a specific example of where YOU intentionally twisted MY words...then I asked if we could "discuss scripture or not" and if you could "do it civilly."
You did not answer!

In my post #73, I proposed that the reason that you and I were clashing might be that we had misunderstood each other's basic premise (in an effort to ease the evident tension and make way for a smooth discussion.) I asked if you agreed that that would make a difference in our discourse.
You did not answer!

In my post #74 (THIS IS MY PERSONAL FAVORITE!!!,) I commented on your reprimand of me for using an English dictionary to look up an English word from an English Bible. Your position was that I should have a Bible definition instead. But, when I asked YOU to provide the BIBLE DEFINITION for the word ("yoked,")
You did not answer!

In my post #68 (oh, maybe THIS is my favorite...I can't decide!,) I ran a reference for "fellowship" (the parallel to "yoked" in your pet II Cor. 6:14,) and there it is in Ephesians 5...along with marriage in Ephesians 5. (My point is that when you proposed that II Cor. 6:14 could not possibly have anything to do with marriage, one of the reasons you gave was that "marriage" or any related words could not be found in II Cor. 6 or the surrounding chapters.) So, when I showed that the parallel (with clear separation teaching) DOES show up in a chapter with marriage,
You did not answer! (and, no, saying that I am "beating a dead horse" and that I already have your and your wife's testimony, does NOT constitute a Bible answer as to why your premise applies to II Cor. 6 but NOT to Ephesians 5 - that was YOUR argument, YOUR standard for the passage, yet
You did not answer!

WHY, if you only want to instruct us in the truth of God's word, would you simply rant about me personally and not answer these things? (This question is, of course, rhetorical, because you have already stated that you don't want to reply...and we all know why!)

If I may inject a little personal opinion - When someone doesn't HAVE answers, they simply resort to popular distraction tactics (rants, personal attacks, and repetiton) to keep the focus off of the original questions!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

Still waiting for a scripture that commands believers not to marry unbelievers and we'll discuss it.

This statement (to me) clarifies your position better than anything else you have written! (I'm not 100% sure, but it seems to express the belief of others on this thread as well.) Are you suggesting that you have an explicit Bible command for every single thing that you do or don't do in life? (Now, before you accuse me of misrepresenting you again, please notice that that was a QUESTION - "Are you...; NOT, you ARE...!" It seems absurd to even have to point that out, but on this forum, I can't even quote scripture and ask how we should apply it or ask for explanation of a teaching or even ask for cross-references without y'all seeking to catch something out of my mouth, that you might accuse me!!! So, again, please remember, it's just a question!

Also, I'd like to "answer" the quote of yours that I gave above (since I affirmed that George did not answer me [post #82] and I thought that was the purpose of forums!) I do not have (and have not claimed to have) "a scripture that commands believers not to marry unbelievers," IF you are saying that the verse must contain those exact words - Again, I don't want to misrepresent you...Isn't that what you are saying??? My assertion is that it is LUDICROUS to assume that Paul would impose that standard ("only in the Lord") on widows and not on the remainder of the body of Christ! Of course, this is the point where I get accused of scripture-wresting and private interpretation, but that's ONLY because you all have rejected/dismissed glaring Bible principles (and cross-references) as irrelevant!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

Pam,

This is my take on what has taken place.

You have held two positions on this thread.

1) Races should not intermarry
2) Believers should not marry unbelievers

This is a KJBO, largely fundamentalist forum. We have asked you for scriptural evidence to back up your assertions. You have provided no relevant scriptural support for either position. We tired of your fast and lose "style" of exegesis and after many, many, many posts back and forth we want to leave it be until you have at least one relevant verse to back up your opinion. Have you any respect to our desire to put it to rest? Not exactly. You come back with a close-ended question designed to be answered with a 'yes" or a "no".
Are you suggesting that you can make a Bible command where one doesn't exist because you feel there should be one?

I notice you have the bad habit of phrasing your questions in such a way as to elicit the answer you are looking for. When I was in my twenties I had a woman boss who pointed this same tendency out to me. I had never realized it. It took me some time to shed that habit, but I was able to once I had been made aware of it.

When studying the scriptures we have to come with a humble heart and an open, expectant mind, if we are to learn anything. I don't know nearly as much as I should because I have been back-slidden off and on (mostly on) for a dozen years. There are people on this board who are very knowledgeable, who have a lot to offer us. People who have studied and walked with the Lord since before we were born, or people with certain gifts and expertise. On a board like this if we pay attention we will even learn HOW TO STUDY the Bible.

I want to leave you with this passage from Philippians chapter 2. This is how I aspire to be. Hopefully, we all do.

Philippians 2:1-8 If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

In Him,

Jennifer

It was my understanding that we would all go back to the race issue after this discussion was completed. And, no the discourse is NOT complete when one party asks questions and receives no answers...only more questions and accusations!

It is almost humorous that this is a "KJBO, largely fundamentalist forum," and yet the most simple yes-or-no question causes people to bristle! The "answer [I was] looking for" is YOUR answer...I made it very clear that I was posing a simple question! To just answer the question would have taken you much less time and effort than to write the response that you did. Why have you and George just tried to identify my "bad habits" instead of staying on the subject?

I do not have any problem answering your question addressed to me quoted above: my simple answer to your yes-or-no question is NO!!! The explanation for my answer (or what I AM "suggesting") is as follows:
The Bible is full of unmistakable principles that constitute "commands," not just suggestions! A couple of examples: Since we are dispensationalists and realize that we must take our doctrine from Paul, we must note that Paul DOES NOT expressly "command" us to abstain from beastiality. There are Bible principles about "uncleanness," "lasciviousness," "going after strange flesh," defiling your temple, and such...but Paul never "commands" a believer not to engage in beastiality! Or how about what kind of car to drive? There are Bible truths that support the idea that it would be wrong (or at the VERY least, absurdly frivolous) for a saved person to buy a Ferrari (sp?): principles of stewardship, having no debt, and using money for God's glory (mission work, etc.)...but again, the Lord never gives any "commands" about what kind of car to drive. There is no scriptural "command" that plainly states that today's Christian cannot have tatoos put on their body or one that "commands" us not to burn our children in the fire as in OT times...We do not have liberty in Christ to do these things just because there is not A VERSE that says not to! This is my whole point!

Also, to address the accusation that I am using scripture out of context, keep this in mind - If we stay STRICTLY in the context of each of the passages I have listed and withdraw ourselves and turn away (separate) from lost people like the Bible says (in the individual context of each portion of scripture,) we could never get attached enough to a lost person to consider a marriage relationship with one - you would have to associate very closely in order to get to know someone that well which, of course, would be in violation of the scriptures I previously posted! In light of this, it is impossible to postulate that various Bible verses about separation of saved and lost people (in different contexts) are not relevant to this discussion!

This is not a desire to go "back and forth" as you say, nor is it a desire to argue as George has repeatedly accused me of...I am simply asking questions and requesting answers (with, I hope, a sufficient amount of clarification) just like I expect y'all to ask me questions and request answers...isn't that what constitutes a forum discussion?

Also, I would like to thank you because (unlike George) you have attempted to have a polite discourse with me (I am assuming here that you sincerely believed [albeit mistakenly!] that I was wresting the scriptures)...we have both used a little sharpness, but that just keeps things lively, I suppose!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

Pam,

You manipulate peoples words even in the way that you quote them. This is
what you chose to include of my words in your post box:

Are you trying to make me out to be a hypocrite by quoting the question that I posed to you in the same manner that you posted to me your question in order to make a point? If that is your intent, it is deceptive.


The reason why I keep responding to you is not because I feel some big need to be right and it's not because I feel obligated to because this is a forum. I respond to you because I honestly don't think you see what we are saying to you. I can't have a discussion about scripture with someone who goes into it with preconceived ideas and looks for scripture to support their position. Believers should go to scripture to find out what God says and then form their opinions based on their understanding of what God has said. Unfortunately, I have seen you come in with preconceived ideas on this thread and try to force scriptures to fit your argument. Does that make you a bad person any more than the rest of the board? I don't think so. Yet, I don't think it is pleasing to God and I don't think you will come to a deeper understanding of His Word that way.

We don't have to argue every point with someone that we don't see eye to eye on. We can agree to disagree for the time being. It's not worth disobeying clear commandments from the Lord about fomenting strife and dissensions. I'm not singling you out here, this applies to all christians. I want to edify you and be a blessing to you and I'm sure you feel the same. We all battle fleshly impulses. None of us is perfect. We must all remember that knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.

In Christ's love,

Jennifer

There, I'll post your entire quote instead of the part I am addressing...Is that what you want??? It was just more clear to quote the exact thing I was responding to at the time...

How in the world did I manipulate your words? All I did was to quote them verbatim!

How am I trying to make you out to be a hypocrite? I thought you asked me a sincere question, as I did you...apparently, I was wrong about that. I answered yours; you still won't answer mine!

I proved conclusively to you the relevance of the previously posted scriptures (you had questioned their relevance,) yet you refuse to accept, address, or even acknowledge that I did so. Instead, you accuse me of coming "into it with preconceived ideas." You say we should "go to scripture to find out what God says," but when I do precisely that, YOU IGNORE IT and talk about anything besides what was in the last post!!!

I realize that we are going to have to "agree to disagree," but would you please, or can you, tell me how/if I failed to prove relevance in my post #86? I would be edified and blessed (like you said was your goal) if you would SIMPLY answer my questions!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

Pam, I just want to let you know that I have to get stuff done right now. I'll try to respond later tonight.

Jennifer

Thanks, and please let me reiterate...From my standpoint, this is NOT an argument; it is a discussion, a lively and friendly debate! I would hope that parties here could give their scriptural positions; explain, question, and clarify; read and study; and in the end, all could be edified and taught by the Holy Ghost (John 14:26.)

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

No. That's a ridiculous and disingenuous question. I also don't believe that we should make up commands if they cannot be demonstrated from the scriptures.

Let me reiterate that I haven't even taken a position on this question. This "discussion" we're engaged in is nothing more than your demonstrated habit of attacking using side issues while avoiding the meat of the matter. Pam, I'm done with this "discussion". There's no point in continuing. Do you want me to admit that you are right? I couldn't care less if I'm proven wrong on everything I've said except that we had better not misapply the scriptures to support our private interpretations.

Jennifer

Re: "Love & Race"
 

Aloha greenbear (Jennifer),

By now you must realize how futile it is to try to reason with someone like Pam. She is determined to be "right", even if she alienates practically everyone on the Forum

Once someone "bends", "twists", and "changes" my words or someone else's words, I write them off as being dishonest and disingenuous. Trying to deal with these kinds of people is "an exercise in futility" - as evidenced by the number of Posts that custer has posted on this Thread.

This is a woman who claimed in her Post #41 - "I DON'T want to argue", and yet she has (at this point in time) posted a total of 19 POSTS of the 89 Posts on the Thread! That's over 21% of all of the Posts on the Thread, and nearly all of them have been obstinate and argumentative.

And out of those 19 Posts - 9 of them have either been addressed to me, or has referenced me. To put it another way - nearly half of her Posts are in relation to me or something that I said. (Makes a person almost believe in Psychiatry/Psychology - but NOT QUITE! :rolleyes:)

Pam just can't "LET GO" - she is determined to PROVE that she is right, at ALL COSTS! I'm used to this - "Westernized" (or "Americanized") women just don't know how to deal with an old curmudgeon like me. You see, having raised and trained 7 children (some probably as old or older than Pam) has given me some understanding of how to deal with women that are "out of order". I REFUSE to let them "sweet talk" me or "bully" me. If they are going to try to act like a man - I treat them like a man. And that just drives "Westernized" (or "Americanized") women like Pam NUTS! :confused:

According to the Bible Christian women are supposed to be like Sarah:

1 Peter 3:1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

If you want to understand what is going on I recommend that you read the Thread on Humanism. Carefully read Post #13 which deals with the perverse "Socratic" Method of teaching - employed by practically all schools in the Western world (especially colleges & universities); and Post #14 which explains "Casuistry" and "Sophism".

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...99&postcount=1

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...27&postcount=5

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...48&postcount=7

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...4&postcount=13

http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3473&postcount=14

I believe that after you read the Thread you will understand WHERE Pam "is coming from", and WHY it is a total waste of your time and mine to try to reason with her. She has been "TRAINED" in these methodologies and her Posts clearly show it!

Look at her latest Post - #90:
After 19 Posts, do you accept her excuse that "this is NOT an argument"? Do you see WHERE she is coming from - "From my standpoint"? That's the WHOLE POINT! Her "standpoint" is all that she "sees" and all that she "cares about". From Pam's "standpoint" everything that has taken place on this Thread is just: "a discussion, a lively and friendly debate!" You could have fooled me! :(

This woman has twisted, bent, changed, and taken other people's words out of context and then inserted her words in their place - and she just considers that: "a discussion, a lively and friendly debate!" It's like I have said before, trying to reason with these kind of people is "an exercise in futility". If you don't believe me - check out Pam's "smart-alack" remark in her Post #4 on the Thread: "Biblical Marriage - Joined together or Yoked together?" http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.php?p=21996&postcount=4

It took me many years to come to an understanding of what is going on - I hope that it doesn't take as long for you.

The following verse is as true today as it was nearly 3,000 years ago:

Proverbs 27:15 A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.

George's quote:
Aloha, George!

Thanks, I would like to understand these methodologies, I'll read the threads.
Our education system has certainly devolved over the last few decades, that's for sure.

The scripture I was thinking of throughout was Jas 5:20 but at some point you have to crawl back out of the quagmire. Of course, no christian loses salvation from being wrong.
James 5:20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

Of course, the Lord can change a believer's thinking in His own good time. He sure did mine!
Romans 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

I pray the Lord to lead me in this way:
Romans 14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

grace and peace, brother George,

Jennifer

No, Jennifer, I did not ask you to admit that I am right! (George would have said "Can you not read English?" but only to me, not you!)

It's rather funny, George, that you have nothing better to do than count all my posts and figure the percentage - TWICE! And if either one of you cared about the truth, you would also point out WHY I have posted over and over and over...here it is:

If I wanted to get answers out of either of you, I had to ask repeatedly...and, of course, some answers I STILL haven't gotten because you obviously don't have them! My latest inquiry was/is COMPLETELY FORTHRIGHT AND SINCERE - "...would you please, or can you, tell me how/if I failed to prove relevance in my post #86?" [Again, I would REALLY LOVE to know what I am missing!] Any thinking person reading this thread could not possibly misunderstand or miss the fact that nobody has answered that - which (YET AGAIN) is all I asked for!

As is your standard operating procedure, George, you went on your typical rant (about Pam and women like Pam) in an effort to keep everyone's mind off the fact that you still can't/won't answer simple questions...this time you even introduced new scripture completely off-topic to put the focus back on ME instead of on the subject at hand!

{Will someone please let George know that the topic IS NOT "PAM"?}

George, concerning my post #4 on your other marriage thread, you know the observation that you label as "smart-alack"...is my observation TRUE OR FALSE? You failed to deal with THAT!

Since you both obviously feel that I am in need of instruction (and I have REPEATEDLY, SINCERELY asked for your input,) I am still waiting for answers to my posts #68, 80, and 86. You have not been interested in teaching me, only in defaming me since you first found that my position varied from yours!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

The context is that the gentile church is not Israel. Only Israel was constrained (with some exceptions) not to intermarry. Gentiles are the ones Israel was forbidden to intermarry with!!! Israel being set aside for a season by God, are we the gentiles now to keep ourselves from marrying each other? That is baseless and absurd. That horse is already out of the stable, anyway, don't you think? If you believe "races" are not to intermarry in the church age, the burden of proof is on you to show that's the case from scriptures. In fact, when did God ever command gentiles not to intermarry with each other at any time?

Jennifer

THE CONTEXT IS exactly what the verse says: "...for ye are all one IN CHRIST JESUS;" IT DOES NOT SAY "in your physical relationships!!!" Like I've said, I really want to go back to this issue with scripture, but right now I am focused on the saved/lost discussion. In the meantime, as far as your last question above, who said anything about gentiles not marrying each other?

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com

Hello, George
 

WEll, I finally read through this interesting thread.

I have heard that Custer is now being "censored" and for what I don't know. I didn't see the personal attacks from her. I saw a lot of personal, defamatory remarks from George. And I saw a lot of unanswered questions.

BTW - I am not going to give my opinion on the topic. So sorry to disappoint.

very happy to see that here you keep that to yourself.

Unfortunately you posted your opinion in another thread. so it seems you lied about not giving your opinion on the topic.

I apologize then for calling you a liar. that may be true. but you mentioned this thread and then gave an opinion as to another's attitude on the other thread. that is what got me. you see it looked as though you took it there to the other thread. people are doing that a lot lately. pursuing others in others threads.

Can everyone just drop George, Custer, Parish and your attitudes and just stick to the topics. remain silent as to attitude. and if someone posts an observation about you or someone. Let it be. maybe God wants to work on someones heart, where it may just be He has been trying for sometime to get that person attention in that area. but if everyone is aggressively pursuing others how will they or you ever hear what the Lord is saying about what has been revealed.

I thank you for your response in paragraph one.
I agree with you whole heartedly in paragraph two.

Thanks Chette!

Well, this is an interesting thread...I've just skimmed the numerous posts and while I'd like to return to the original question, I'd also like to offer my 2 cents on the hijacked part of the thread.

The whole context of II Corinthians 6 is separation. Basically avoid the wrong crowd...on many levels. The carnal Corinthians just could not get this right. Constantly hanging with false teachers and the like.

Verse 14 is probably the definitive verse used to prove that an unbeliever and a believer should not marry.

A yoke causes the 2 harnessed to go in the same direction. Where one goes, so goes the other. I am reminded of Amos 3:3 -

Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

This can be true for so many other situations...jobs, military, school...any place where you put yourself under the authority of another.

So many of us (my self included) can obviously take this thought to extremes.

One certainly should avoid an alliance with an unbeliever because as a believer you will not only cause problems for yourself but the Body of Christ.

v. 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

One should be careful making rules that aren't there. I saw no where that anyone on here supported, recommended, suggested, counseled, etc that it was a good idea to marry an unbeliever.

Having said that however, I am certainly teaching my children and anyone that is under my influence that it is NOT good to yoke yourself to an unbeliever, not only in marriage, but in other areas of life. If married to an unbeliever one will certainly have heartache, I've seen horrendous situations where 1 spouse was saved and the other not. I believe the outcome would certainly be a sowing/reaping situation, but I am not suggesting the Lord will condemn such a marriage but just the natural progression of things. There are many things that we do that have negative consequences, but are not a direct punishment from the Lord.

As Dr. Ruckman has said many times our standards should be to get saved, believe the Book, spend time reading the Book, pray and surrender when the Lord deals with you through His Word.

No, but I'm sure we can agree that they will have to give an account for their actions in marrying an unbeliever at The Judgment.

Amen.


Agreed. As I stated earlier, I got lost in the thread, but was someone suggesting that we should?


Ignorantly married a lost person...sure, I'll give you that.

Willfully? James 4:17 comes to mind.

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

While it's not up to us to shake a finger, scowl and judge, it will be judged as sin by God. I don't believe as a state of sin, but a single act of sin.



Surely no one argued differently?

Interestingly I have heard this quoted a time or 2 in defense of marrying an unbeliever in attempts to win them to the Lord.

To quote myself:


While that's true, that was supposed to be edited out. :)

Amanda
 

The way that I see it Amanda (being married to a lady from Pakistan) is that the Lord did not allow the Israelis to intermarry with those of other nations for a number of reasons.

1) God had separated them from other nations as His own people because He was sworn to them by covenant, which meant that they were there to reflect His name & nature on earth.

2) If they would have intermarried (as some did) then they would have been enticed to go after other gods and thus reflect the heathen abominations that they had been separated from (which they ended up doing and it often lead to them being chastised).

But in Christ (whether Jew or Gentile) all people are made one new man in Christ!

God separated the nations at Babel because they were intent on building a global empire of one people and one language with ungodly intentions. God separated them for a reason (and that reason was clear) mankind can never come together for good outside of Christ – but in Christ it is a far different story.

God has wrought miracles in our marriage (even before day one!) – we have a son and a whole unique testimony.

Hope this is an additional help to the many replies that you have had (it must have taken you a day to read them!)

God bless

PaulB

Amanda's
Smarts is not always discernment. Don't take offense. I like you a lot. But from what I've read you don't always look at the big picture.


2 Cor 6:14 is not about marriage.

There's enough written about marriage... we don't need to import incidental verses to support our position that it is not God's will that believers marry unbelievers.

Biblical marriage is not about being yoked together. It is about being joined together. It was to His Jewish disciples that Jesus said, Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. I don't believe this applies to us, but even if it did, Jesus is the plowman. We are not "yoked" with Him. Christian marriage is a similitude of Christ and His church. We are joined. We are in Him, and He is in us. There is no yoking, there is a joining of ourselves to Christ.

John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

Whether old time Bible commentators, pastors or Bible teachers, or ourselves try to apply the analogy of yoking to the marriage relationship, it is just plain wrong. It destroys the true analogy that Christ and Paul gave of being joined to Christ, being in Christ. We are not yoked to Christ. We are not doing works along side Him. We are doing works in Him.

John 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

Romans 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

Who are we to say what God can or can't do when a believer marries an unbeliever? How many times do each one of us sin every single day of our lives? Are we to be hypocrites? His ultimate purpose, I firmly believe, is not to have us follow a set of rules, but to take out of the gentiles a people for his name.

I have noticed in my life that He sometimes does it in unorthodox ways.

I was editing this sentence but my computer crashed.

I would like to change it to say:

His ultimate purpose in this dispensation, I firmly believe, is not to have us follow a set of rules, but to take out of the gentiles (and Jews who will believe Pauls' gospel of grace) a people for his name.

I believe you are mistaken if you're insinuating that's how this verse was used in this thread by either George or myself.

You believe I am mistaken that I have heard this verse as an excuse to marry an unbeliever?

That's not what I said.

True that marriage is being joined together. But consider this Scripture:
Would you say that according to the Word that marriage is also a bondage? You are bound to your mate?

Here breaking a yoke is breaking a bond. There are other such verses that equate a yoke with servitude.


Agreed.

And marrying an unbeliever doesn't destroy that analogy?

I don't think I ever said that...this is what I said:

I also said,

Are you saying that it's good to marry an unbeliever?

Oh yeah as to this comment,

Forgive me. Perhaps you'd like to show me the bigger picture. Feel free when I offer my simplistic posts to either pass over them or bring me alongside..."Now Amanda, you've got some good points but let me show you the bigger picture" :D I welcome you to.

Kinds reminds me of the ole Southern "bless their heart"...LoL One can say whatever they wish as long as you end it by saying "bless their heart"

Amanda, I do like you.
You are way off there. I'm the furthest thing from a southern bell you could ever meet. I don't mean to insinuate anything. If I do, call me on it. I don't ever want to be that way. I don't think you deal in insinuations, either. You are straight forward that's why I like you even if I don't agree with you on some things.

You seem to be accusing me of being proud and arrogant. Why? Because I have a different perspective than you? And because I come out and say what I think? Because I don't have tact? I never said you have simplistic posts. I think you are very smart and very knowledgeable. I've noticed you aren't shy about your opinions, either. You seem more than able to defend yourself. So what's the problem?

I think you're great. I don't have a lot of guile. I'll answer your other points when I can, tonight or tomorrow night. You taught me some things and I can see you have a lot more you can teach me, if you want to. I look at myself as sort of a misfit in the "christian community". I learned everything I know from reading my Bible and from my husband, with virtually no contact with the "christian community". I find my husband and myself agree most with George's and Tony's viewpoints. Not that they are quite the same. I am thrilled that you joined this forum. You just don't get to come in with your guns blazing and not get challenged, that's all. You'll find I am very willing to concede something when I can be proven wrong.

Jennifer

True, wasn't labeling you as a southern belle but it did remind me of that :)

No, I was trying to lighten the post. It's sort of a joke around here that you can say "bless their heart" and the gossip or bad mouthing will be totally looked over. :) I thought the same about the don't take offense comment. :) It is so hard sometimes to communicate feeling in writing but the LoL was intended to try and communicate that. I am not one that would "LoL" in a mean spirited manner :)

No but in my intro thread I admitted that I tended to being simplistic. I realize you possibly haven't read that post. Sorry :)

Again, an attempt to be light, and I wasn't totally in jest. You stated I sometimes fail to see the bigger picture which suggests you do see the bigger picture sometimes. I am apt to bunny trail or try and discuss one small point rather than the the bigger picture as you suggested. Feel free to steer me back around to the topic at hand and I will follow :)

LoL That's true :D I totally laughed out loud because I certainly don't picture myself that way although my husband tended to agree :p

Be blessed!

Oh not at all! In my lifetime, not on this forum. Sorry for not being clearer :)

I believe I do. I need my big picture to be filled in more. George and others here help me with that.

Someone who responds sentence by sentence is alright in my book. It keeps me from getting too confused!

My
:pound:
I had to laugh at myself. I really don't have any tact, sometimes. LOL.
I can see where that southern belle comment came from, although I think they are much more nimble in their phrasing. Sorry. :)

Greenbear,

I asked a couple of questions in a previous post and you had stated you would get back with me in a bit, and that's ok. I know we're all busy :) But meanwhile I had one more thought.

One thing that continnually comes up in discussions on here is if Paul didn't say it to us specifically, it doesn't apply...While I certainly don't argue with the dispensational aspect of that line of thinking, I do think that Paul was trying to make it easy on these Christians who just couldn't get it right...

1  And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.


But as one grows in Christ, reads and studies their Bible they are able to discern better and get to more meatier issues and by comparing Scripture with Scripture understand these things.

I find it very interesting that you seem to have come up with a new philosophy on whether or not it is wrong to marry an unbeliever when quite honestly I know of absolutely no Bible Believer or teacher at any time in history ever teach it so. Correct me if I am wrong.
Obviously it matters not what man thinks or teaches but I do believe it is worth considering.

Curious...What does one do with this verse?

I Peter 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

And then in Phil. 4:3

And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.

A yokefellow is a fellowlabourer in Christ who's name is in the book of life.

Whether or not there is an explicit command it certainly is not a stretch to take all these verses and put them together and form the belief that it is not good, a sin even, to marry an unbeliever.

Again, if one has done so then seek not to be loosed but abide. I see it no different than any other sin, one that will be forgiven but you will have to give an account of it.

I know of at least 2 women who ignorantly married unbelievers. They were going to church. Professed belief. After marriage the husbands stopped going to church and said there is no God. One is being divorced by her husband and the other has to sit through shows about how Jesus was just a person. Both do their best to obey the Bible and fulfill their roles as laid out.

Both were pretty thoroughly duped by the men as were everyone in their lives because they played the role well till soon after they got married. I suppose there had to be signs, but even the "pastors" were fooled.

Where did you come up with that? Please show me where I have seemed "to have come up with a new philosophy on whether or not it is wrong to marry an unbeliever"?

I have given my understanding and my arguments from scripture. Please reread this thread and the Biblical Marriage thread and tell me where I came up with some new teaching that it's God's will that we marry unbelievers.

Then we agree that we are to rightly divide the scriptures. I would never never never never never say that only Paul's words apply to christians. If we correctly understand what the church is and who we are in Christ (which we mostly understand from Jesus' direct revelation of His gospel of grace to Paul) then we can have discernment as to what words in the rest of the Bible we are to apply to our selves and our lives and the whole body.