Remarrying after a Divorce....is it forbidden?

[firehill]

firehill

it is apparent in your double talk here that you do not believe in any type of authority taking greek words and twisting the meaning to make the word of God null and void doesn't help those who are in trouble within their marriages to add further burdens to their lives.

Why don't you prove your accusation stated with such confidence.

To twist and disannul the authorities in the home and in the church is to bring further harm to those in trouble and is to give ungodly advice.

There is one leader of the home and that is the LORD. Again read my posts in the thread 'Husband 911, how do we let them leadt the home?' in General Discussion. How did authority structure within the church come into play here?

...and the word says if you are married to an unbeliever and the unbeliever is happy to stay married to you since you became a Christian do not depart from them and that the husband who is a non-believer can be won over to being a Christian by the chaste conversation of the wife.

Yes, such is biblical.

But in the cases of physical abuse it is a matter of life and death and one should not stay in these cases in my opinion but seperate.

Good point.

The authority came into play because it is found in the word of God the chain of command is in

1 Corinthians 11:3--"But I would have you to know that the head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman is the man and the head of Christ is God."

that is God's chain of authority and it is very plain in scripture to see. the word "head" means authority

God the Father is head of Jesus Christ

Jesus Christ is head of the Man

Man is head of the Woman

OC

Show me then in the Bible where the word 'authority' is written regarding Christ/man, man/woman and God/Christ.

Try to read 11:3 in it's actual context, vv1-16 which is whorship NOT authority structure. Also take note in the passage of the one instance in which the word 'authority' is actualy written and in regards to the woman's own.

Research the earliest lexicons for that mystery meaning also. And if you should ever come across such a source defining kephale as 'authority' re-write some history.

My apologies for getting off topic, OP!

firehill

you can deny the chain of authority all you want that is your perogitive to do so.

But if you will get out your greek dictionary and use and look up the word "head" you will find out what it means.

I think I am having to re-write some history back to what it was to start with cause alot of folks seems not to want to fall in line with the chain of authority God has so set in order. I am not less of a person because the man is over me in authority. And a man is no less of a man because Christ is his head

as far as the picture portrayal of marriage goes the man is to portray Christ in the home and as he submit his will to that of the lord's will then the family will follow Christ as he does and he will rule his household well. As far as the women in marriage in her submission to her husband she is a picture of the church that is submissive to the husband which Christ is the head of the church and Christ is submissive to the Father's will.

oc

If it were a chain of authority then why is it written UPSIDEDOWN? That's odd for Paul because he wrote hierarchies of the gifts in his letters. Where would you fir the Holy Spirit into this upsidedown hierarchy? Many read into the text that which isn't there. It happens.

[firehill]

Firehill, since you continue to deny their is authority in the home outside of Jesus, I will add these verses as well. Ephesians 5:22-24

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body.

24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

To anyone reading this to get the true meaning and not to try to change it to fit a specific agenda, it is obvious that it is saying that the wife is to submit to the husband. The word submit is from the Greek word hupotasso which means to subordinate; refles. to obey: be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be,make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto. As everyone is to be in subjection to the Lord Jesus Christ, wives are to be in subjection to their own husbands. This is plain.

The husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. The word head in the Greek literally means head. In this instance, it cannot mean a literal physical head as it would make no sense. It therefore has to be in authority, though authority is not in the definition. The head rules over the body. Anyone can logically put that together.

In the same way the church is in subjection to Christ, wives are to be to their own husbands. The word subjection is from the Greek word hupotage which means subordination. As the church is to be subordinate to Christ, wives are subordinate to their own husbands. Do you have someone disputing the meaning of these Greek words as well?

I've already answered how a husband leads his home. He attempts to make decisions with his wife. When they are at an impass, he ultimately has the last say. There is nothing tough to figure out here. If the man is being led by Christ, he is obeying the Bible, because it is Jesus' written word.

You must have missed this post Firehill.

In the Greek in v.22 the word for 'sumbit' does not exist because it is borrowed from v.21 which binds all christians to submit to eachother. That means husbands to wives. There is a thread on the meaning of this Greek word. You should have a look at it.

The word most certainly does exist. All words that were added for clarification are in italics and this word is not. It comes directly from the word hupotasso. The scripture in verse 21 is dealing with our relationship with Christians in general. We are to minister to each others needs. Verses 22 through 24 are dealing with husbands and wives specifically. I don't need another thread with the definition of the Greek word used here as I already included the definition in my post right out of the Greek Dictionary.

The thread is, 'Wives role in marriage, By John MacArthur' in General Discussion. LOOK IN THE GREEK not an English translation of NT. The word does NOT exist, it is not written in v.22. That's a fact.

[firehill]

Let me also add this. The Bible clearly does say children are to obey their parents just as wives are to submit to their husbands. I wonder how long it will be before some expert comes up with a new Greek definition for words indicating parental headship over their children and make it null and void?

Interesting though that the Bible never says that parents are the 'head' of their children.

Here is what it does say in Ephesians 6:1 "CHILDREN, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.

My point is that someone can just as easily pervert the word obey and claim it doesn't mean what it clearly does and say children really don't have to obey their parents.

Yes, the Bible does say that. Iv'e never known any to say that children should not obey their parents. It is also a command written in the OT law.

[Openly Curious]

firehill

it is apparent in your double talk here that you do not believe in any type of authority taking greek words and twisting the meaning to make the word of God null and void doesn't help those who are in trouble within their marriages to add further burdens to their lives.

Why don't you prove your accusation stated with such confidence.

To twist and disannul the authorities in the home and in the church is to bring further harm to those in trouble and is to give ungodly advice.

There is one leader of the home and that is the LORD. Again read my posts in the thread 'Husband 911, how do we let them leadt the home?' in General Discussion. How did authority structure within the church come into play here?

...and the word says if you are married to an unbeliever and the unbeliever is happy to stay married to you since you became a Christian do not depart from them and that the husband who is a non-believer can be won over to being a Christian by the chaste conversation of the wife.

Yes, such is biblical.

But in the cases of physical abuse it is a matter of life and death and one should not stay in these cases in my opinion but seperate.

Good point.

The authority came into play because it is found in the word of God the chain of command is in

1 Corinthians 11:3--"But I would have you to know that the head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman is the man and the head of Christ is God."

that is God's chain of authority and it is very plain in scripture to see. the word "head" means authority

God the Father is head of Jesus Christ

Jesus Christ is head of the Man

Man is head of the Woman

OC

Show me then in the Bible where the word 'authority' is written regarding Christ/man, man/woman and God/Christ.

Try to read 11:3 in it's actual context, vv1-16 which is whorship NOT authority structure. Also take note in the passage of the one instance in which the word 'authority' is actualy written and in regards to the woman's own.

Research the earliest lexicons for that mystery meaning also. And if you should ever come across such a source defining kephale as 'authority' re-write some history.

My apologies for getting off topic, OP!

firehill

you can deny the chain of authority all you want that is your perogitive to do so.

But if you will get out your greek dictionary and use and look up the word "head" you will find out what it means.

I think I am having to re-write some history back to what it was to start with cause alot of folks seems not to want to fall in line with the chain of authority God has so set in order. I am not less of a person because the man is over me in authority. And a man is no less of a man because Christ is his head

as far as the picture portrayal of marriage goes the man is to portray Christ in the home and as he submit his will to that of the lord's will then the family will follow Christ as he does and he will rule his household well. As far as the women in marriage in her submission to her husband she is a picture of the church that is submissive to the husband which Christ is the head of the church and Christ is submissive to the Father's will.

oc

If it were a chain of authority then why is it written UPSIDEDOWN? That's odd for Paul because he wrote hierarchies of the gifts in his letters. Where would you fir the Holy Spirit into this upsidedown hierarchy? Many read into the text that which isn't there. It happens.

Hello firehill

Now you have really peaked my curosity here with this reply. Please could you explain further what you mean on "upsidedown hierarchy" from the text of 1 Corinthians 11:3 as I have no clue what you are meaning thus far.

OC

[EricH]

Here is what it does say in Ephesians 6:1 "CHILDREN, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.

My point is that someone can just as easily pervert the word obey and claim it doesn't mean what it clearly does and say children really don't have to obey their parents.

Key phrase in that verse is "In the Lord". If a parent is demanding something unjust, or telling a child to do something unscriptural, or beating or otherwise abusing their child, then it certainly isn't "In the Lord".

4And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

Col. 3:20Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.

21Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

We are not to heed the word or command of authority figures above the laws of God, regardless of who they are: parent, government, pastor, etc.

A diagram of this sentence can better help us understand the meaning of the phrase "in the Lord" The phrase is basically a preposition in the dative case. It modifies the verbal imperative "be obedient". It does not modify the noun. It is designed to "amplify" the verbal action. Thus it is the children's obedience that is to be "in the Lord". Not the parents. Paul is not creating an exit clause here that allows children to evaluate their parents to determine if their behavior is in the Lord. Paul is giving children a motivation. Their obedience is to be in the Lord, because they are in the Lord. This is probably a ditive of means "obey by the Lord".

[EricH]

Firehill, since you continue to deny their is authority in the home outside of Jesus, I will add these verses as well. Ephesians 5:22-24

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body.

24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

To anyone reading this to get the true meaning and not to try to change it to fit a specific agenda, it is obvious that it is saying that the wife is to submit to the husband. The word submit is from the Greek word hupotasso which means to subordinate; refles. to obey: be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be,make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto. As everyone is to be in subjection to the Lord Jesus Christ, wives are to be in subjection to their own husbands. This is plain.

The husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. The word head in the Greek literally means head. In this instance, it cannot mean a literal physical head as it would make no sense. It therefore has to be in authority, though authority is not in the definition. The head rules over the body. Anyone can logically put that together.

In the same way the church is in subjection to Christ, wives are to be to their own husbands. The word subjection is from the Greek word hupotage which means subordination. As the church is to be subordinate to Christ, wives are subordinate to their own husbands. Do you have someone disputing the meaning of these Greek words as well?

I've already answered how a husband leads his home. He attempts to make decisions with his wife. When they are at an impass, he ultimately has the last say. There is nothing tough to figure out here. If the man is being led by Christ, he is obeying the Bible, because it is Jesus' written word.

You must have missed this post Firehill.

In the Greek in v.22 the word for 'sumbit' does not exist because it is borrowed from v.21 which binds all christians to submit to eachother. That means husbands to wives. There is a thread on the meaning of this Greek word. You should have a look at it.

The word most certainly does exist. All words that were added for clarification are in italics and this word is not. It comes directly from the word hupotasso. The scripture in verse 21 is dealing with our relationship with Christians in general. We are to minister to each others needs. Verses 22 through 24 are dealing with husbands and wives specifically. I don't need another thread with the definition of the Greek word used here as I already included the definition in my post right out of the Greek Dictionary.

The thread is, 'Wives role in marriage, By John MacArthur' in General Discussion. LOOK IN THE GREEK not an English translation of NT. The word does NOT exist, it is not written in v.22. That's a fact.

I did look up the word in Greek and it does exist. When a situation arises where a word is inserted in the text that was not in the original Greek, it is placed in italics in the Bible, and doesn't appear in the Greek reference in the Abington-Strongs Concordance. What they do is show that one word in Greek covered two in English. That is not the case here.

It is true that the verb be subject does not occur in v22. It is in v21. But that does not impact the meaning at all. It is very common in greek for verbs to function elliptically (be used once and then inferred in the context). It is a literary divice

[EricH]

A diagram of this sentence can better help us understand the meaning of the phrase "in the Lord" The phrase is basically a preposition in the dative case. It modifies the verbal imperative "be obedient". It does not modify the noun. It is designed to "amplify" the verbal action. Thus it is the children's obedience that is to be "in the Lord". Not the parents. Paul is not creating an exit clause here that allows children to evaluate their parents to determine if their behavior is in the Lord. Paul is giving children a motivation. Their obedience is to be in the Lord, because they are in the Lord. This is probably a ditive of means "obey by the Lord".

So you're suggesting a child should obey their parents even if the parents are promoting sin, or if it is causing harm to the child or others?

No,

I am saying this passage does not support the idea you proposed. You would need to find other texts to do that. This one addresses the motivation for the children's obedience. It does not address the conditions under which they may decline obedience. The grammar does not support this interpretation

[EricH]

Here is yet another scripture from 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. While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear."

The word subjection is from the Greek word hupotasso which means to subordinate; reflex. to obey: be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to,under), submit self unto.

Are you going to try to make the claim this word doesn't appear in the original text either?

Butero,

The word does appear in Ephesians as well. It is just used elliptically. In other words it is used once but functions to govern several phrases. It is still valid to read Ephesians 5:22 as using the verb, even through it is only used once in the section

[EricH]

The grammar does not support this interpretation

Even if that's true, it doesn't take much looking to find other scripture which does support the interpretation I gave.

It would be interesting to do a study on these verses to determine what the parameters actually are

[firehill]

firehill

it is apparent in your double talk here that you do not believe in any type of authority taking greek words and twisting the meaning to make the word of God null and void doesn't help those who are in trouble within their marriages to add further burdens to their lives.

Why don't you prove your accusation stated with such confidence.

To twist and disannul the authorities in the home and in the church is to bring further harm to those in trouble and is to give ungodly advice.

There is one leader of the home and that is the LORD. Again read my posts in the thread 'Husband 911, how do we let them leadt the home?' in General Discussion. How did authority structure within the church come into play here?

...and the word says if you are married to an unbeliever and the unbeliever is happy to stay married to you since you became a Christian do not depart from them and that the husband who is a non-believer can be won over to being a Christian by the chaste conversation of the wife.

Yes, such is biblical.

But in the cases of physical abuse it is a matter of life and death and one should not stay in these cases in my opinion but seperate.

Good point.

The authority came into play because it is found in the word of God the chain of command is in

1 Corinthians 11:3--"But I would have you to know that the head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman is the man and the head of Christ is God."

that is God's chain of authority and it is very plain in scripture to see. the word "head" means authority

God the Father is head of Jesus Christ

Jesus Christ is head of the Man

Man is head of the Woman

OC

Show me then in the Bible where the word 'authority' is written regarding Christ/man, man/woman and God/Christ.

Try to read 11:3 in it's actual context, vv1-16 which is whorship NOT authority structure. Also take note in the passage of the one instance in which the word 'authority' is actualy written and in regards to the woman's own.

Research the earliest lexicons for that mystery meaning also. And if you should ever come across such a source defining kephale as 'authority' re-write some history.

My apologies for getting off topic, OP!

firehill

you can deny the chain of authority all you want that is your perogitive to do so.

But if you will get out your greek dictionary and use and look up the word "head" you will find out what it means.

I think I am having to re-write some history back to what it was to start with cause alot of folks seems not to want to fall in line with the chain of authority God has so set in order. I am not less of a person because the man is over me in authority. And a man is no less of a man because Christ is his head

as far as the picture portrayal of marriage goes the man is to portray Christ in the home and as he submit his will to that of the lord's will then the family will follow Christ as he does and he will rule his household well. As far as the women in marriage in her submission to her husband she is a picture of the church that is submissive to the husband which Christ is the head of the church and Christ is submissive to the Father's will.

oc

If it were a chain of authority then why is it written UPSIDEDOWN? That's odd for Paul because he wrote hierarchies of the gifts in his letters. Where would you fir the Holy Spirit into this upsidedown hierarchy? Many read into the text that which isn't there. It happens.

Hello firehill

Now you have really peaked my curosity here with this reply. Please could you explain further what you mean on "upsidedown hierarchy" from the text of 1 Corinthians 11:3 as I have no clue what you are meaning thus far.

OC

You say 11:3 is a chain of command yes? Well the direction of chain of commands is from top to bottom. If you notice 11:3 doesn't start with God on the top, then list jesus, then man. God as 'head' is mentioned last rather...