|
|
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 5:12:12 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mikesayen
quote:
ORIGINAL: therealshowlove
quote:
ORIGINAL: Isaiah331516
gmspice,
Romans 7:2
For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
She is bound as long as he is in fact still her husband. If they are legally divorce under the terms as outlined in THE LAW, then he is no longer her husband and she is no longer bound to him. This scripture made it clear that a widowed woman was free to remarry and opposed a school of thought that sought to chain a woman to a dead man.
"The Law" in rom 7:1-3 and 1 Cor 7:39 is not speaking about the Law of Moses but the Law of God said in 1 Cor 14:34 of "submission as the Law also says.." speaking about the Gen 3:16,, in 9 out of 10 christian commentaries.. check it out.
Where is this "Law of God" that you refer to and how does it differ from the Law that God gave to Moses?
quote:
Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
All this proves is that God considered it punishment for the woman's desire to be unto her husband and that he rule over her.
Even God thought that was severe punishment.
Now if this "rulership" had been so BEFORE the fall and a part of THE PERFECT WILL OF GOD then it would have not been considered punishment later on.
< Message edited by therealshowlove -- 6/10/2009 5:32:40 PM >
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 5:18:22 PM
|
|
|
Isaiah331516
Posts: 248
Joined: 1/5/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Qtman
That is what he is saying but it is absolutely wrong. The vast majority of the instructions in the Bible was addressed to "man". That was a cultural thing.
what do you mean a cultural thing? are you saying that the word for wife in greek, gynç, does not mean wife?
this was written to the woman and then at the end addresses the man.
do you read this gender neutral? not being sarcastic, really wondering :-)
1 Corinthians 7:11
But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 5:45:42 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: Belle_Texas
quote:
To support the crazy idea that Jesus was really condoning divorce as long as the paperwork was properly taken care of requires one to ignore almost every piece of evidence we have about the language and culture of the first century Jewish people. This is an excellent example of deciding what one wants the Scriptures to say grasping at straws for anything that might support that understanding and ignoring every piece of evidence that demonstrates that understanding to be impossible
You mean to say that all this back and forth posting has been about PAPERWORK!! 
I will admit, in the reading these last 15-20pages of posts, I sometimes had no idea what the point was that you were both trying to make..but I think I see now.
Thanks for clarifying...I think I get it!!
There are several different conversations going on, but the most disturbing one right now is not quite about "paperwork" i.e. it has been proposed that:
Jesus actually was condoning divorce for any reason as long as a husband gave his wife a certificate of divorce. The (false) claim made is that, Jesus was only condemning the practice of divorce when a husband refused to give the wife he was divorcing a certificate of divorce, and that those passages in which Jesus discussed divorce are only discussing a legal procedure for divorce and not in anyway condemning the practice of divorce for frivolous reasons.
It is a classic example of twisting Scripture, and while I do believe there is a lot of room for disagreement about when divorce is acceptable, when remarriage is permitted, etc... there are times that a proposed interpretation is so in conflict with the evidence from Scripture (and history) that it should be completely disregarded. This proposition is one such example. The reason I spent as much time as I did debating this issue is that I believe that if anyone accepted what was proposed here and acted on it would be extremely damaging to their lives and the lives of their families because what was proposed is in such direct contradiction to what is taught in Scripture.
Here are some of the problems with that theory.
1) You must assume that the translators of our English bibles were wrong when they used the word "divorce" in these passages. As someone who reads Hebrew and (a very little bit of) Greek. I can assure you that the translators of the prominent English bibles did a very good job, and I am very cautious when someone offers a "new" translation; especially when it is clear that they themselves have not studied the biblical languages and have no basis other than their agenda on which to suggest a "new" translation. None of our English bibles are perfect, but they are very good representations of the original language and when they all agree, I believe that very compelling evidence should be offered before accepting an alternate translation.
2) There is no historical support for such a belief. Divorce was a topic much discussed in the early Jewish writings (as it was also in the early church). We understand well what the prominent Rabbis of Jesus day taught and the debate among different Rabbis; many of the links I provided were references to these early writings. The false claim was made that Jesus was condemning an ongoing and accepted practice of divorcing without the proper paperwork, and there is ZERO historical documents that support such a claim. Although the Rabbis of the first century had large disagreements about the reasons in which divorce should be permitted, they were in complete agreement when it came to providing the proper paperwork as part of the divorce procedure.
3) Theologically such a claim does not match the character of God. Throughout the bible we are instructed to honor our word, honor the covenants we make (as does God). While it is clear that divorce is sometimes required (we even see this figuratively in God's dealings with Israel), it is also clear divorce is something that God does not take lightly and reconciliation is always his hearts desire. There is no question that Jesus was addressing a heart issue (as he always did) and not a legal issue.
That sounds "deep" but it isn't a matter of Jesus "condoning" divorce.
In his response to the Pharisees Jesus did not contradict the Law as already given by His Father in Deut.
As for errors in the translation of biblical text, well, come now, read your history books.
As for the "character of God", well, apparently it was within His character. After all HE put away and gave a writ of divorcement to Israel. He did the same thing that he apparently allows man to do, providing an example of what constitutes legal divorce in the process.
Does it grieve our Father when divorce occurs? I absolutley believe that it does.
Does that alone make it illegal, apparently not. We know this because He has done so Himself.
As for this "piece of paper", apparently it was necessary as not one single divorce THEN OR NOW is legal without it. So your attempt to reduce the significance of this writ means nothing.
Without this "piece of paper" to prove that a woman was divorced she was subject to the charge and penalty of adultery so the significance of the "piece of paper" was huge for women. Particularly at a time when women were exposed to the whims of men.
Jesus in his response to the Pharisees and his disciples, as he did many other times, helped women by no longer allowing their husbands to "deal treacherously" with them.
Mal 2:16 For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for [one] covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.
< Message edited by therealshowlove -- 6/10/2009 7:02:17 PM >
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 5:51:28 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: Qtman
I guess it depends on which book you read. Either we are not reading the same book, and by the way I do not use Strong's, or you are ignoring over half of the definitions.
To support the crazy idea that Jesus was really condoning divorce as long as the paperwork was properly taken care of requires one to ignore almost every piece of evidence we have about the language and culture of the first century Jewish people. This is an excellent example of deciding what one wants the Scriptures to say grasping at straws for anything that might support that understanding and ignoring every piece of evidence that demonstrates that understanding to be impossible.
quote:
FYI - The definition in Strong's is always extremely concise because there simply isn't a whole lot of room, but in this case the poster did leave out a lot.
Hebrew 7971. shalach, shaw-lakh'; a prim. root; to send away, for, or out (in a great variety of applications).
One entry from Strong's that sheds a great deal of light on how this word was understood in terms of marriage is found in entry 7964 i.e.
"shilooach, from 7971; (only in plur.) a dismissal, i.e. (of a wife) divorce (espec. the document); also (of a daughter) dower:- presents, have sent back.
In other words, one of the legal words (noun) used to describe the "certificate of divorce" comes from the exact root that forms the verb used to describe the action of divorce. This is a common feature of the Hebrew language i.e. nouns and verbs formed from the same root typical share a common theme. Examples: "Yalad" means "to give birth", "Yeled" is a boy (child), and "Yaldah" is a girl; "achal" means "to eat" and "achalah" is food.
quote:
7971
Strong's Number: 07971 Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
xlX a primitive root
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Shalach TWOT - 2394
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
shaw-lakh' Verb
Definition
to send, send away, let go, stretch out
(Qal)
to send
to stretch out, extend, direct
to send away
to let loose
(Niphal) to be sent
(Piel)
to send off or away or out or forth, dismiss, give over, cast out
to let go, set free
to shoot forth (of branches)
to let down
to shoot
(Pual) to be sent off, be put away, be divorced, be impelled
(Hiphil) to send
It still means send away NOT divorce.
One thing for certain it DOES NOT describe is a certificate of divorce.
What you basically asset is that the biblical translators by passed every common usage for the term.
Not only that shalach IS connected to a divorce ONLY if it also includes -
Hebrew 3748. keriythuwth, ker-ee-thooth'; from H3772; a cutting (of the matrimonial bond), i.e. divorce.
After all one does not divorce without also sending away. (duh)
What God hates is the opposite which is sending away without a divorcement
< Message edited by therealshowlove -- 6/10/2009 6:12:34 PM >
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 6:01:10 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
If a spouse separates from their husband or wife are they still married?
What makes them legally divorced?
Can they stand on a mountain and shout it to the masses then consider themselves divorced?
Why not?
If a man leaves his wife and has not seen or spoken to her for twenty years can he legally marry another?
Why not?
In all of the examples given what must be done?
It really ain't that deep.
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 6:08:40 PM
|
|
|
Isaiah331516
Posts: 248
Joined: 1/5/2009
Status: offline
|
legal divorce is something we, humans, the world says is okay.
this is very clear to me considering that MANY things we say are okay are NOT in God's eyes. relying not upon man's understanding, but God's, is a good place to start.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 6:36:54 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Isaiah331516
legal divorce is something we, humans, the world says is okay.
this is very clear to me considering that MANY things we say are okay are NOT in God's eyes. relying not upon man's understanding, but God's, is a good place to start.
Indeed it is a dreadful thing and something to be avoided whenever possible.
But you have completely failed to prove that divorce is biblically unlawful.
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 7:02:18 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 4566
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
One thing for certain it DOES NOT describe is a certificate of divorce.
This statement of yours is just one more indication of your unwillingness to let the facts get in the way of your preconceived idea's. Here's is the original Strong's reference plus one more reference, not that facts will likely make any difference.
שלח (from the reference already provided from Strong's) entry 7964 "shilooach, from 7971; (only in plur.) a dismissal, i.e. (of a wife) divorce (espec. the document); also (of a daughter) dower:- presents, have sent back.
שלח (From Langenscheidt's Hebrew dictionary) m, only pl. שלוחים, dismission, repudiation [of a wife];bill of divorce; dowry.
Of course if you do bother to check the references, we can always chalk this one up to another "innocent mistake," right?
_____________________________
אשת־חיל מי ימצא ורחק מפנינים מכרה
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 7:11:52 PM
|
|
|
saraimay75
Posts: 8864
Joined: 5/11/2005
From: Wherever God plants me.
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Isaiah331516
legal divorce is something we, humans, the world says is okay.
this is very clear to me considering that MANY things we say are okay are NOT in God's eyes. relying not upon man's understanding, but God's, is a good place to start.
My father was married before he married my mother. Why my father divorced his first wife I don't know. It really not any of my business. Also my father would not tell me why he divorced his first wife. So, Isaiah331516 I have a question for you.
My parents have been marred for 40 years does any of that count?
_____________________________
You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself any direction you choose.
~Dr. Seuss
http://forums.crosswalk.com/Saraimay75_Cruising_Around
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 7:32:42 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
One thing for certain it DOES NOT describe is a certificate of divorce.
This statement of yours is just one more indication of your unwillingness to let the facts get in the way of your preconceived idea's. Here's is the original Strong's reference plus one more reference, not that facts will likely make any difference.
ùìç (from the reference already provided from Strong's) entry 7964 "shilooach, from 7971; (only in plur.) a dismissal, i.e. (of a wife) divorce (espec. the document); also (of a daughter) dower:- presents, have sent back.
ùìç (From Langenscheidt's Hebrew dictionary) m, only pl. ùìåçéí, dismission, repudiation [of a wife];bill of divorce; dowry.
Of course if you do bother to check the references, we can always chalk this one up to another "innocent mistake," right?
Unfortunatley for you I did check, that is why I, unlike what you apparently are used to, do not take your post at face value.
"entry 7964 "
Original Word Word Origin
xwllX from (07971)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Shilluwach TWOT - 2394b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
shil-loo'-akh Noun Masculine
Definition
sending away, parting gift
sending away
parting gift
When is this term used in the bible?
King James Word Usage - Total: 3 present 2, send back 1
KJV Verse Count
Exodus 1
1 Kings 1
Micah 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strong's Number: 07971 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
xlX a primitive root
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Shalach TWOT - 2394
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
shaw-lakh' Verb
Definition -
to send, send away, let go, stretch out
(Qal)
to send
to stretch out, extend, direct
to send away
to let loose
(Niphal) to be sent
(Piel)
to send off or away or out or forth, dismiss, give over, cast out
to let go, set free
to shoot forth (of branches)
to let down
to shoot
(Pual) to be sent off, be put away, be divorced, be impelled
(Hiphil) to send
King James Word Usage - Total: 847
send 566, go 73, (send, put,...) forth 54, send away 48, lay 14, send out 12, put 10, put away 7, cast out 7, stretch out 5, cast 5, set 5, put out 4, depart 4, soweth 3, loose 3, miscellaneous 22
< Message edited by therealshowlove -- 6/10/2009 7:52:19 PM >
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 8:39:09 PM
|
|
|
mikesayen
Posts: 477
Joined: 12/17/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: therealshowlove
If a spouse separates from their husband or wife are they still married?
What makes them legally divorced?
Can they stand on a mountain and shout it to the masses then consider themselves divorced?
Why not?
If a man leaves his wife and has not seen or spoken to her for twenty years can he legally marry another?
Why not?
In all of the examples given what must be done?
It really ain't that deep.
It is required that a "writ" of divorce be written and given to her hand Deut 24:1. This was imporatant for it was not only a testament against her but breaking of the covenant Is 50:1. as Heb 8:9-13 the covenant was broken with Judah and Israel and says in Jer 3:8-9 a writ of divorce was given to Israel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2009 8:44:15 PM
|
|
|
mikesayen
Posts: 477
Joined: 12/17/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Isaiah331516
legal divorce is something we, humans, the world says is okay.
this is very clear to me considering that MANY things we say are okay are NOT in God's eyes. relying not upon man's understanding, but God's, is a good place to start.
This is correct. Mal 2:16 says "God hates divorce" and Jesus said of Marriage latter in Matt 19:6-9 "let not man separate what God has joined togeather" because they are "no longer two but one flesh".
New Heart
Jesus said, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so” Matt 19:8. But we have been given a “new heart” Eze 36:26 and no longer live in the hardheartedness of sin for the reason to “put away” our wives, but to obey Christ in all righteousness. God gave us this example by staying married to Judah in Jer 3:8-9 even when she did worse and returned in "falsehood".
We are not to live according to the Law of Moses 1 Tim 1:9 but it is for the lawless. We living by the Spirit of God fufill all righteousness, the righteous requirements of the Law.. in which it says if you Love God and Love man you fufill the whole Law.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 2:50:54 AM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
Unfortunatley for you I did check, that is why I, unlike what you apparently are used to, do not take your post at face value.
Unfortunately, you don't bother to read the reference (or purposely chose to ignore it). It seems you simply choose to search for a source whose entry didn't contain the parts you don't want to hear rather than checking the sources I provided.
Although I originally provided the reference from my hard copy of Strong's, I did find an one line reference.
Strong's Hebrew Lexicon Search Results Result of search for "7964": 7964 shilluwach shil-loo'-akh or shilluach {shil-loo'-akh}; from 7971; (only in plural) a dismissal, i.e. (of a wife) divorce (especially the document); also (of a daughter) dower:--presents, have sent back.
The reality is that I always expect people to be able to verify the references I provide, so I have to wonder if your misrepresentation of my post was due to ignorance i.e. not understanding that many references use Strong's numbers besides Strong's itself, or you were deliberately attempting to mislead people.
The "reality" is that you must resort to accusing me of dishonesty.
I did not misrepresent anything or anyone.
I too copied from an on-line Hebrew lexicon. Strong's no less. I copied it verbatim without adding or subtracting a word, no I changed, added nor deleted nothing.
YOU need to believe that I did.
Not only that, but your accusation, despite your attempt to divert attention away from the truth, does not disprove my contention that to shalach a spouse did not constitute nor was it equivalent to a legal dissolution of marriage without a writ of divorcement. No where in the bible is shalach translated as divorce or a writ of divorcement.
The term is used over 800 times in the bible for "sent away".
Tell me why did God BOTH shalach Israel AND give her a writ of divorcment if the two were the same thing?
Why does Deut. command a husband to both send his wife away (separate) AND give her a writ of divorcement?
Was shalach ALSO a term used and included in discussions concerning and in REFERENCE to divorce? Since the term GENERALLY means to send away there is no contradiction because one cannot divorce a spouse without also leaving them or sending them away.
Does shalach mean divorce in and of itself?
Since a spouse can depart and/or be sent away (separation) without being actually divorced the answer is NO.
Do you really want to insist that couples in ancient Israel did not have martial difficulties, just as they do today, that led to separation but did not always end in divorce?.
What was that called?
quote:
LexiConc Results for -put away- Search for an English word in the Blue Letter Bible Lexicon Enter an English Word:
Beginning of the Word
Any Part of the Word
The Entire Word
(Help)
There are 7 entries that match "put away."
Strongs # Hb/Gk Word Pronunciation English Equivalent
Old Testament (Hebrew)
H1644 garash gä·rash' drive out, cast out, thrust out, drive away, put away, divorced, driven, expel, drive forth, surely, troubled, cast up, divorced woman
H7971 shalach shä·lakh' LexiConc Results for -put away- Search for an English word in the Blue Letter Bible Lexicon Enter an English Word:
Beginning of the Word
Any Part of the Word
The Entire Word
(Help)
send, go, (send, put,...) forth, send away, lay, send out, put, put away, cast out, stretch out, cast, set, put out, depart, soweth, loose
New Testament (Greek)
G115 athetçsis ä-the'-tâ-sçs disannulling, to put away
G630 apolyô ä-po-lü'-ô release, put away, send away, let go, set at liberty, let depart, dismiss, misc
G659 apotithçmi ä-po-tç'-thâ-mç put off, lay aside, lay down, cast off, put away, lay apart
G683 apôtheô ä-pô-the'-ô cast away, thrust away, put from, thrust from, put away
G1808 exairô eks-î'-rô take away, put away
Return to Top Cite This Page:
Blue Letter Bible. "LexiConc Search for 'put away'". Blue Letter Bible. 20 Apr 2007. 11 Jun 2009.
< http:// www.blueletterbible.org/search/lexiconc.cfm?Criteria=put+
away&st=any >
Search the Bible
KJVNKJVNLTNIVESVRVRNASBRSVASVYNGDBYWEBHNVVUL
Range Options
e.g. Gen;Psa-Mal;Rom 3-9
Search the BLB
Search Options
Beginning of the WordAny Part of the WordThe Entire Word
Featured Items
MyBLB:
My Preferred Bible
Today's Items:
Day by Day by Grace
Daily Promise
Bible Reading
Morning & Evening Devotion
Items of Interest:
ISBE
Daily Bible Reading Program
NT Introductions
Sayings Not Found in Scripture
Scripture Difficulties
I copied EVERY SINGLE WORD so as to notbe accused of dishonesty again. 
And here EVERY WORD from another site.
quote:
Home > Lexicons > Hebrew > Shilluwach
The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon
Strong's Number: 07964 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
xwllX from (07971)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Shilluwach TWOT - 2394b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
shil-loo'-akh Noun
)Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Shilluwach TWOT - 2394b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
shil-loo'-akh Noun Masculine
Definition
sending away, parting gift
sending away
parting gift
King James Word Usage - Total: 3
present 2, send back 1
KJV Verse Count
Exodus 1
1 Kings 1
Micah 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 3
< Message edited by therealshowlove -- 6/11/2009 3:05:40 AM >
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 3:16:32 AM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
A man who 'put away' his wife was no more divorced than an engaged man was actually married.
As with engagement one was a significant step leading to a desired ending.
Both could signify intent but neither was in and of itself the completion of the matter.
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 10:19:43 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 4566
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: therealshowlove
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
Unfortunatley for you I did check, that is why I, unlike what you apparently are used to, do not take your post at face value.
Unfortunately, you don't bother to read the reference (or purposely chose to ignore it). It seems you simply choose to search for a source whose entry didn't contain the parts you don't want to hear rather than checking the sources I provided.
Although I originally provided the reference from my hard copy of Strong's, I did find an one line reference.
Strong's Hebrew Lexicon Search Results Result of search for "7964": 7964 shilluwach shil-loo'-akh or shilluach {shil-loo'-akh}; from 7971; (only in plural) a dismissal, i.e. (of a wife) divorce (especially the document); also (of a daughter) dower:--presents, have sent back.
The reality is that I always expect people to be able to verify the references I provide, so I have to wonder if your misrepresentation of my post was due to ignorance i.e. not understanding that many references use Strong's numbers besides Strong's itself, or you were deliberately attempting to mislead people.
The "reality" is that you must resort to accusing me of dishonesty.
I did not misrepresent anything or anyone.
I too copied from an on-line Hebrew lexicon. Strong's no less. I copied it verbatim without adding or subtracting a word, no I changed, added nor deleted nothing.
The reality is that you copied this from a (very abridged) online version of "Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon," NOT STRONG'S. This lexicon can be found on Crosswalk.com (which is likely where you found it) and the source is cited both at the entry point and on each page.
Note: while this particular (abridged) Lexicon doesn't mention the "certificate of divorce" usage of this noun (7964), it does mention the action 'to divorce' in its definition of the verb (7971)
quote:
YOU need to believe that I did.
I believe you looked up this word in an online resource, but NO I DON'T NEED TO BELIEVE that resource was Strong's. I have a hard copy of Strong's on my desk, and I checked and linked to online versions of Strong's and they do not contain the definition you provided. I did provide a link to an abridged online ""Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon," which contains the definition you provided.
quote:
Not only that, but your accusation, despite your attempt to divert attention away from the truth, does not disprove my contention that to shalach a spouse did not constitute nor was it equivalent to a legal dissolution of marriage without a writ of divorcement.
Again, anyone who bothers to check can see that the information you provided was inaccurate. Whether it was a deliberate attempt to mislead people or done out of ignorance is something only God knows, but there is no question that the information you provided is wrong and no question that your accusation that I provided a false references was inaccurate.
And Yes, the facts do prove your contention WRONG!
quote:
No where in the bible is shalach translated as divorce or a writ of divorcement.
ESV Malachi 2:16 "For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless."
NAU Malachi 2:16 "For I hate divorce," says the LORD, the God of Israel, "and him who covers his garment with wrong," says the LORD of hosts. "So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously."
NET Malachi 2:16 "I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel, "and the one who is guilty of violence," says the LORD who rules over all. "Pay attention to your conscience, and do not be unfaithful."
NIV Malachi 2:16 "I hate divorce," says the LORD God of Israel, "and I hate a man's covering himself with violence as well as with his garment," says the LORD Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith.
NLT Malachi 2:16 "For I hate divorce!" says the LORD, the God of Israel. "To divorce your wife is to overwhelm her with cruelty, " says the LORD of Heaven's Armies. "So guard your heart; do not be unfaithful to your wife."
כי־שנא שלח אמר יהוה אלהי ישראל וכסה חמס על־לבושו אמר יהוה צבאות ונשמרתם ברוחכם ולא תבגדו
quote:
The term is used over 800 times in the bible for "sent away".
Yes, it only means divorce when it is used in the context of sending away a wife i.e. it is an idiom! When a man "sends" a spear towards his enemy, God "sends" his hand, or many similar usages it does not mean divorce.
quote:
Tell me why did God BOTH shalach Israel AND give her a writ of divorcment if the two were the same thing?
Why does Deut. command a husband to both send his wife away (separate) AND give her a writ of divorcement?
Because this was a requirement of the Law, and one that was regularly practiced. It was automatically assumed that when a man "sent his wife away" that he also gave her a "certificate of divorce". Again you have provided ZERO evidence to support your contention that the Hebrew people of the first century practiced a type of divorce that did not include a certificate of divorce, and we have a significant amount written by the Hebrew people of the first century themselves that contradicts this claim.
quote:
And here EVERY WORD from another site.
Another site??? I always wonder WHY people cite references like this i.e. "another site" unless they are deliberately trying to obscure the source. Again the source is an abridged version of "Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon," not Strong's. An honest reference would have indicated the correct source and offered this as a alternate reference for consideration rather than trying to indicate that the source was from somewhere it was not.
quote:
quote:
Home > Lexicons > Hebrew > Shilluwach
The KJV Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon
Strong's Number: 07964 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
xwllX from (07971)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Shilluwach TWOT - 2394b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
shil-loo'-akh Noun
)Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Shilluwach TWOT - 2394b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
shil-loo'-akh Noun Masculine
Definition
sending away, parting gift
sending away
parting gift
King James Word Usage - Total: 3
present 2, send back 1
KJV Verse Count
Exodus 1
1 Kings 1
Micah 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 3
_____________________________
אשת־חיל מי ימצא ורחק מפנינים מכרה
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 10:32:39 AM
|
|
|
laura...
Posts: 3284
Joined: 3/1/2005
From: NE Ohio
Status: offline
|
quote:
Jesus actually was condoning divorce for any reason as long as a husband gave his wife a certificate of divorce.
No. Because there had to be legitimate grounds for divorce in order to obtain a Certificate of Divorce.
_____________________________
This is what the Lord says: “Stop at the crossroads and look around. Ask for the old, godly way, and walk in it. Travel its path, and you will find rest for your souls. But you reply, ‘No, that’s not the road we want!’ Jer 6:16
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 10:43:21 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 4566
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: laura...
quote:
Jesus actually was condoning divorce for any reason as long as a husband gave his wife a certificate of divorce.
No. Because there had to be legitimate grounds for divorce in order to obtain a Certificate of Divorce.
Of course, if you ignore the biblical text, offer a "new" translation, and ignore all of the other sources of historical documents that describe divorce in the first century Jewish culture you can ignore the fact that legitimate grounds were required for divorce.
_____________________________
אשת־חיל מי ימצא ורחק מפנינים מכרה
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 11:12:04 AM
|
|
|
C.D.
Posts: 68
Status: offline
|
As Christians we are to obey those in authority over us .So to be legally divorced in the eyes of the law of the land where the couple was married is to be truly divorced I believe.
You can't just leave and then say you are divorced. That is not really divorce.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 12:07:12 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 4566
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: C.D.
As Christians we are to obey those in authority over us .So to be legally divorced in the eyes of the law of the land where the couple was married is to be truly divorced I believe.
You can't just leave and then say you are divorced. That is not really divorce.
Agreed, it is not now a "divorce", nor was it a "divorce" in the first century.
The idea that Scripture needs to be reinterpreted to conclude that Jesus was addressing a problem of people getting divorced without the proper legal paperwork is ridiculous because there is no indication that such a problem existed in the first century; the evidence we have indicates that this kind of abandonment was less of a problem in the first century Jewish culture than it is today and the context of the passage itself makes this interpretation impossible.
_____________________________
אשת־חיל מי ימצא ורחק מפנינים מכרה
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 2:21:00 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
You know what?
I started to answer your post regarding what YOU have deemed as the sole (doesn't make it so tho) legitimate resources for translations of the Hebrew text.
THEN I read these post from you and decided not to waste my time.
In your posts here regardless of whether or not it was your intention, you in essence agree that
to send away a spouse without a writ is not a divorce.
quote:
The term is used over 800 times in the bible for "sent away".
Yes, it only means divorce when it is used in the context of sending away a wife i.e. it is an idiom! When a man "sends" a spear towards his enemy, God "sends" his hand, or many similar usages it does not mean divorce.
Tell me why did God BOTH shalach Israel AND give her a writ of divorcement if the two were the same thing?
Why does Deut. command a husband to both send his wife away (separate) AND give her a writ of divorcement?
Because this was a requirement of the Law, and one that was regularly practiced. It was automatically assumed that when a man "sent his wife away" that he also gave her a "certificate of divorce". Again you have provided ZERO evidence to support your contention that the Hebrew people of the first century practiced a type of divorce that did not include a certificate of divorce, and we have a significant amount written by the Hebrew people of the first century themselves that contradicts this claim.
There here is no proof that it was automatically assumed that when a man sent away his wife that he also gave her a writ of divorcement. Being human, couples did separae then reconcile without ever getting a divorce.
And last but not least..
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
ORIGINAL: C.D.
As Christians we are to obey those in authority over us .So to be legally divorced in the eyes of the law of the land where the couple was married is to be truly divorced I believe.
You can't just leave and then say you are divorced. That is not really divorce.
Agreed, it is not now a "divorce", nor was it a "divorce" in the first century.
The idea that Scripture needs to be reinterpreted to conclude that Jesus was addressing a problem of people getting divorced without the proper legal paperwork is ridiculous because there is no indication that such a problem existed in the first century; the evidence we have indicates that this kind of abandonment was less of a problem in the first century Jewish culture than it is today and the context of the passage itself makes this interpretation impossible.
Nothing has been "reinterpreted" it simply is what it is.
I must quote you again for in light of these many pages of discussion your quote is most astounding.
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
Agreed, it is not now a "divorce", nor was it a "divorce" in the first century.
Wow!
Ok, so you can no longer argue that shalach and giving a writ of divorcement are the same thing.
So now, in order to uphold your viewpoint, you have to make the absurd contention that no one in Israel ever broke the Law.
If that were so the whole discussion between the Pharisees and Jesus in Math 19 and between Jesus and his disciples in Mark would have been moot.
After all it would be as you contend and, "everyone followed the Law" and "Israel was totally immune to the infiltration of the customs of the dominate culture".
You really believe that there were no marital separations in Israel where there was not also divorce. Really?
You really believe that when a couple did divorce there was no period of separation before or until the writ was granted?
All divorce request were not granted so you really believe that Jewish men were always so pious as to stay with their wives even if the Jewish Elders declared that they could not divorce her?
You really believe that no Jewish man ever abandoned the law and simply left his wife without a writ because they always followed the law to the letter?
(Gee, no wonder they didn't think they needed Jesus. )
< Message edited by therealshowlove -- 6/11/2009 2:27:16 PM >
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/11/2009 2:57:12 PM
|
|
|
therealshowlove
Posts: 131
Joined: 4/15/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: laura...
quote:
Jesus actually was condoning divorce for any reason as long as a husband gave his wife a certificate of divorce.
No. Because there had to be legitimate grounds for divorce in order to obtain a Certificate of Divorce.
Absolutely!
It was not as easy for a man to divorce his wife as some might think.
Under the Law he had to prove grounds for divorce.
No-fault divorce, then as now, is not of God.
_____________________________
2Cr 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband.
My, my, my I FINALLY got it! And my soul says yes! I could not have chosen better myself!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/12/2009 1:34:19 PM
|
|
|
mikesayen
Posts: 477
Joined: 12/17/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: C.D.
As Christians we are to obey those in authority over us .So to be legally divorced in the eyes of the law of the land where the couple was married is to be truly divorced I believe.
You can't just leave and then say you are divorced. That is not really divorce.
Agreed, it is not now a "divorce", nor was it a "divorce" in the first century.
The idea that Scripture needs to be reinterpreted to conclude that Jesus was addressing a problem of people getting divorced without the proper legal paperwork is ridiculous because there is no indication that such a problem existed in the first century; the evidence we have indicates that this kind of abandonment was less of a problem in the first century Jewish culture than it is today and the context of the passage itself makes this interpretation impossible.
I agree that even if the state reconize your divorce you are still not divorced in God's eyes Matt 5:31-32. You are still bound to each other, committing adultery "against" the other if you remarry. And according to the Law of Moses all that was required was a "writ" of divorce and have it handed to her, but we are to uphold the laws of the land, so if our country requires for a divorce then we are to obey our countries laws. Also, the only way for a divorce to be officialed correctly is if the man has knowledge of the woman's sexual immorality in the marriage.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/13/2009 7:16:06 PM
|
|
|
Isaiah331516
Posts: 248
Joined: 1/5/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
I agree that even if the state reconize your divorce you are still not divorced in God's eyes Matt 5:31-32. You are still bound to each other, committing adultery "against" the other if you remarry. And according to the Law of Moses all that was required was a "writ" of divorce and have it handed to her, but we are to uphold the laws of the land, so if our country requires for a divorce then we are to obey our countries laws. Also, the only way for a divorce to be officialed correctly is if the man has knowledge of the woman's sexual immorality in the marriage.
this is one very good reason to marry whom God has for us to marry. agreed?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Remarriage After Divorce - One Stop Thread - 6/13/2009 8:14:57 PM
|
|
|
saraimay75
Posts: 8864
Joined: 5/11/2005
From: Wherever God plants me.
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mikesayen
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: C.D.
As Christians we are to obey those in authority over us .So to be legally divorced in the eyes of the law of the land where the couple was married is to be truly divorced I believe.
You can't just leave and then say you are divorced. That is not really divorce.
Agreed, it is not now a "divorce", nor was it a "divorce" in the first century.
The idea that Scripture needs to be reinterpreted to conclude that Jesus was addressing a problem of people getting divorced without the proper legal paperwork is ridiculous because there is no indication that such a problem existed in the first century; the evidence we have indicates that this kind of abandonment was less of a problem in the first century Jewish culture than it is today and the context of the passage itself makes this interpretation impossible.
I agree that even if the state reconize your divorce you are still not divorced in God's eyes Matt 5:31-32. You are still bound to each other, committing adultery "against" the other if you remarry. And according to the Law of Moses all that was required was a "writ" of divorce and have it handed to her, but we are to uphold the laws of the land, so if our country requires for a divorce then we are to obey our countries laws. Also, the only way for a divorce to be officialed correctly is if the man has knowledge of the woman's sexual immorality in the marriage.
Well, then my parents have been committing adultery for 40 years. However neither of them is a Christan yet so it should not matter.
_____________________________
You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself any direction you choose.
~Dr. Seuss
http://forums.crosswalk.com/Saraimay75_Cruising_Around
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
