Paul And Marriage

[Rivers]

If that were true, why would it have been Elijah who restored the keys of sealing to Christ, in Matthew, and Joseph, in the Doctrine and Covenants?

Lehi

Good point.

[Zakuska]

It was a traveling tent, literally just a dwelling place for God. As for what happened to IT, I have no idea, but God asked David to build him a house, a stationary one.

Actually it was David who asked if he could build a house. God was fine dwelling in a tent. David asked Nathan and Nathan told him he could, but then he had a Nightmare and had to go give David the bad news that God wanted his son to build the temple instead. (2 Sam 7)

[Jesterss]

Did you even read the paragraph from Josephus?

I did.

Further, you discount entirely the words of the Bible itself regarding the upper chambers. Two mentions, separated bu many chapters tell us there were two floors.

You neglect to realize that these chambers were not directly in relation to the temple aka, holy place and most holy place, these chambers were constructed in rooms next to these two rooms.

The Bible tells us the Temple was 120 cubits high (180 feet). What do yo want?

Where?

The Bible tells us there were two floors (both covered in gold). What do you want?

Where?

Josephus never saw Solomon's Temple. It was destroyed centuries before he was born. He sued documents (lost to us, btw) from the period to write his history of the Jews.

I said King Cyrus, regarding the Second Temple.

With which scripture(s) does it not line up?

It surely does with 1 Chr 28:11~12 and 2 Chr 3:9. It does, as well, with Ezekiel's vision.

None of those speak of a second floor when regarding the holy place and most holy place. The chambers referenced were about the annexes and portico's.

Edited September 22, 2011 by Jesterss

[Jesterss]

Actually it was David who asked if he could build a house. God was fine dwelling in a tent. David asked Nathan and Nathan told him he could, but then he had a Nightmare and had to go give David the bad news that God wanted his son to build the temple instead. (2 Sam 7)

Agreed, thanks for the correction.

[LeSellers]

No. There wasn't. There were annexes built along side it with multiple stories, but the temple itself, containing the holy place and most holy place, did not have a second floor.

Then what do 1 Chr 28:11~12 and 2 Chr 3:9 mean when they explicitly speak of "upper chambers? This is in addition to the "annex", the three-storied building that surrounded the Temple on three sides, but only up to the top of the first floor.

If you're going to stubbornly hold to an obviously untenable position, one the Bible refutes, then it seems useless to continue to talk to you.

The bible doesn't say there was a second floor to the temple. as you quoted from 1 chronicles, there was an upper chamber, but it does not say the upper chambers is where the holy of holies was located.

What are you talking about? First, the Bible says there were "upper chambers", plural, so there were more than one.

I have not claimed the Holy of Holies was on the second floor. It was on the first floor. What Josephus tells us is that there was another room of the same size as the Holy of Holies (and presumably directly above it), just as there was a larger room of the same size as the Holy Place.

You are twisting the understanding. David gave his son the plans for all the surrounding things and the treasuries. It does not say that the holy of holies sat above any of these.

And I have never said it was. You seem to be having difficulty understanding what I am saying.

What David told Solomon about building the Temple was, first and most importantly, it was by the spirit, and somewhere on down the list, that there were to be two floors: "upper chambers".

Who mentions a veil on the second floor?

You might try reading the Bible: "It's in there."

You already said that the veil wasn't between the rooms. You said there was a golden door between the rooms chained with golden chains. So which is it that you claim?

Both, because I am speaking of two separate floors with two rooms each.

• 
  On the ground floor, there were the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place (or Holy of Holies) separated by a bi-fold door held closed by a golden chain.
  
• 
  On the second floor (first floor for our European friends), there were likewise two rooms, these separated by the vail.
  

There are other temples of egyptians and phoenician that exist. Solomon's temple was built by the phoenicians. we know what theirs looked like. Solomon even said he had no idea how to build one so he needed their help. A trap I presume?

Hardly, since the Spirit told David how to build the Temple, and although he was forbidden to build it himself, he told Solomon exactly what to do, it seems whatever theory you come up with for the design of the Temple is completely off the mark.

It was a traveling tent, literally just a dwelling place for God. As for what happened to IT, I have no idea, but God asked David to build him a house, a stationary one.

Well, you are wrong on one serious count, but that aside, we should at least acknowledge that God not only approved, but revealed the form through the spirit, as we read in 1 Chronicles, chapter 28.

Have you ever wondered what the "annex" was for? There were dozens of small rooms connected to the Temple, but they were not part of the religious function of the Temple.

Lehi

Edited September 23, 2011 by LeSellers

[Jesterss]

Lets just recap the points made throughout this discussion.

[LeSellers]

Lets just recap the points made throughout this discussion.

Go ahead.

Lehi

[Jesterss]

LDS View and points that have been made through this entire posting... add to if you wish for me to address more..

1 Corinthians 7

-Believed that paul was only consenting that sexual relations ok only during marriage. (T-Shirt)

-Present distress was in regards to preaching the gospel, not the second coming.(T-Shirt)

-Paul doesn't speak from the Lord, only his own accord.(T-Shirt)

-Better to marry than to burn (T-Shirt)

Writings of Clement of Alexandria + Eusebius + Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7 + Phillippians

-Thinks Paul was married. (T-Shirt)

-Paul (being married) didn't take his wife along with him.

-Abide even as I understood as continence, not marital status, future missionaries should serve missions while still single. (T-Shirt)

-Ignatius believed Paul was married. (T-Shirt)

-True Yokefellow believed to be understood as referring to his wife in phillippians. (T-Shirt)

-Clement of Alexandria believes Paul met with his wife in one of his epistles. (T-Shirt)

-Took wives with them on missionaries. (T-Shirt)

Own Assumption Based off LDS belief or own Belief?

-NIV translations are wrong (LeSellers)

-No more apostles after John of Patmos. (LeSellers)

-Early church fathers, plus Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius promulgated true doctrine, but with no authority to do so. (LeSellers)

-Plural marriage not in conflict with bible. (LeSellers)

-Adam and Eve were immortal before the fall. (LeSellers)

-Apostasy had already begun by the time of Paul. (T-Shirt)

1 Corinthians 11 & 6

-Man is not apart from a woman. (Zakuska)

-We will judge the angels, being greater than they. (Zakuska)

Romans 7 & 8 + Gensis maybe?

-Marriage required under the law of moses. (AlterSteve + Zakuska)

-Covenant of marriage known since the time of adam, but not adequately passed down to us. (AlterSteve)

-Law of Moses marriage was only for this life. (AlterSteve)

-Children of God. Joint-heirs with christ. (AlterSteve)

-Paul states an eternal marriage. (Zakuska)

Galatians 1

-Apostasy began before the original disciples passed. (LeSellers)

-Apostasy not as important as early church's rejection of legitimate priesthood authority, accepting a false priesthood that was apostasy. (LeSellers)

Matthew 22 + Mark + Luke 20 + Greek Understandings of Each

-Sadducees did not believe in resurrection. (LeSellers + AlterSteve)

-Jesus was preaching eternal marriage. (LeSellers + AlterSteve)

-Sadducees were asking about eternal marriage. (LeSellers)

-"They" do not marry ("people" is incorrect) was referring to the seven brothers and wife. (LeSellers)

-No weddings in heaven. (LeSellers + AlterSteve + T-Shirt)

-Active verbs discussing marriage, neither marry nor given in marriage is referring to the act of wedding ceremonies in heaven. (LeSellers)

-Jesus was teaching eternal marriage, or a higher law than the law of moses. (AlterSteve)

-Greek was mistranslated, we have no counterpart for the perfect tense that the Greeks had for married or given in marriage. (AlterSteve)

-Would of used Married if wanted it to mean no married people in heaven. (AlterSteve)

-These seven brothers and wife would be like the angels, representing the unmarried state. (AlterSteve)

-Being an angel is not the highest calling. (AlterSteve)

Deuteronomy 23

-Any man not able to reproduce shall not enter into heaven. (Zakuska)

Deuteronomy 25 + Tobit

-Sadducees deny the resurrection. (AlterSteve)

-"Sara" not married to any of these brothers, so all died unmarried. (AlterSteve)

**Temple discussion wasn't part of the thread topic so I have left it off of these review points.**

***Correct any missing points before I address all these qustions and points in one reply.***

Edit: +1 change for the addition of Zakuska under Romans 7 section.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Jesterss

[Jesterss]

I'm basically going to just requote what most of us said into one post, so we can actually have an understanding of the entire subject rather than a piece here, followed by irrelevant rant, then pieces here..

[Zakuska]

Lets not forget Paul Jestress.

Romans 7

1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

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.

3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Marriage is eternal and since for all intents and purposes death has been Abolished and lead away captive by Christ and we live forever. We are bound by the Law of Marriage for Eternity.

[Jesterss]

lol, I might of tasked myself with something almost impossible.. perhaps if anyone feels some questions went un-answered they can post their question again or something.. I don't know how to really reply to everything, it's impossible to get the correct viewpoint without writing an entire book for both sides..

edit: and i'm no preacher and I'm not here to impose my view to make people believe it, was just rather curious of the back and forth responses to LDS view and my view... I thought for the most part there was some good exchanges..

Edited September 23, 2011 by Jesterss

[Calm]

edit: and i'm no preacher and I'm not here to impose my view to make people believe it, was just rather curious of the back and forth responses to LDS view and my view... I thought for the most part there was some good exchanges..

I like the recap at the end of the discussion, very useful imo.

[LeSellers]

I'm basically going to just requote what most of us said into one post, so we can actually have an understanding of the entire subject rather than a piece here, followed by irrelevant rant, then pieces here..

I believe you have attributed some points to the wrong advocate, but it's not terribly important.

What would be useful is if you took each point (or small group of points) and listed whether you accept them, reject them, or have not decided.

Your list also fails to cover the points you asserted.

It may be that Solomon's Temple with its upper chambers, vail, and floor plan, was off topic, but please recall, you were the one who introduced the theme of Temple marriage, claiming it was not a feature of Israelite custom and writings. You categorically stated that there were not Temple marriages in Israel. My response was that you could not make that claim because you do not know what happened upstairs in Solomon's Temple.

But thank you for the effort. It may well advance the discussion.

Lehi

[Jesterss]

Your list also fails to cover the points you asserted.

Yeah I wasn't sure if it would seem too repetitive. But here's my points.

Starting with Tertullian, in his book "De Monogamia" he concludes that he believes paul was single. As do I.

1 Corinthians 7

1: Paul says that it is not good for men to have sexual relations with women, but since sexual immorality is occurring, men should have sex with their wives.

8: Paul tells the virgins and widowers to stay unmarried, just as he does. (So he is either a widower or virgin)

25-26: Remain in whatever state it is God called you in, married or single.

28: It is better to be single than to marry and be worrying about earthly affairs. Too many distractions.

39:A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives;

Romans 7

1-3: 1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?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.3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

marriage is an earthly law.. "til death do us part" is not an added phrase, it is straight from this section.

Genesis 2

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Never says one spirit. That's because it is an earthly bondage so man is not lonely on earth. We will not be lonely in heaven with God. That much I know.

If God wanted to say that it was eternal, wouldn't he have said spirit? Because after all, we all agree that the natural is first, then the spiritual. If it were eternal, he would have said one spirit. But he never does, it is always one flesh.

1 Corinthians 6

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Clearly the opportunity of one spirit exists in Gods mentioning of life. There are things that are eternal, but marriage is never depicted as one.

and we have of course the writings of Matthew, Mark and Luke, but as we already have discussed, Mormon Apologists believe that Matthew 22 was misinterpreted and the meaning skewed. So we can include that point or not, but will obviously be a consistent point of contention and non-agreement.

[altersteve]

1 Corinthians 7

1: Paul says that it is not good for men to have sexual relations with women, but since sexual immorality is occurring, men should have sex with their wives.

Paul does not say that "it is not good for men to have sexual relations with women," he is quoting something that was written in a letter to him previously.

8: Paul tells the virgins and widowers to stay unmarried, just as he does. (So he is either a widower or virgin)

He never says anything about virgins. He says that those serving as missionaries who are unmarried or widowed are best off staying that way, for now.

25-26: Remain in whatever state it is God called you in, married or single.

He doesn't say this. He simply says that the Lord has no commandment for virgins that he is aware of, so he gives his own judgment that "for the present distress," it is good for a man to be a virgin. What he meant by "present distress" is up for debate, but he was probably talking about a problem that was taking place at the time in the mission field.

28: It is better to be single than to marry and be worrying about earthly affairs. Too many distractions.

If you're a missionary.

39:A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives;

This does not mean that a woman is no longer sealed to her husband after he dies, it means that after he dies she is free to marry another man.

]Romans 7

1-3: 1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?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.3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

marriage is an earthly law.. "til death do us part" is not an added phrase, it is straight from this section.

Same as above. This is only saying that if a woman's husband dies, she is free to marry somebody else. She is "loosed from the law of her husband," not from her husband himself. It is not saying that they will no longer be married in eternity.

Genesis 2

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Never says one spirit. That's because it is an earthly bondage so man is not lonely on earth. We will not be lonely in heaven with God. That much I know.

If God wanted to say that it was eternal, wouldn't he have said spirit? Because after all, we all agree that the natural is first, then the spiritual. If it were eternal, he would have said one spirit. But he never does, it is always one flesh.

In this instance, "one flesh" is a metaphor to describe the unity shared by a married man and woman. In the afterlife, they will continue to be "one flesh." Latter-day Saints believe that all things were created spiritually before they were created physically, and that there is no reason that something must be spirit in order for it to be eternal. We will be resurrected physically, not spiritually, in the life hereafter; we will receive immortal perfected bodies like Christ's, and our bodies will once again be united with our spirits permanently, since the lack of a body is considered bondage. Spiritual resurrection (being born again) happens in this life.

1 Corinthians 6

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

Clearly the opportunity of one spirit exists in Gods mentioning of life. There are things that are eternal, but marriage is never depicted as one.

Notice that it says "he," and does not refer to marriage. A single person joined unto the Lord is a single person. But said person can also be joined with somebody else.

and we have of course the writings of Matthew, Mark and Luke, but as we already have discussed, Mormon Apologists believe that Matthew 22 was misinterpreted and the meaning skewed. So we can include that point or not, but will obviously be a consistent point of contention and non-agreement.

Nobody believes the meaning was skewed. It means exactly what it says. Those who had every chance to marry in this life but failed to do so will not be married or given in marriage in the next, and they will be as the angels. Plain and simple. This is 100% LDS doctrine, which adds, however, that those who are married in this life, by someone with the proper authority to do so, will continue to be sealed to their husband/wife for eternity, and they will become not like angels, but like God, and Christ was obviously teaching this or else the Sadducees wouldn't have asked Him this question.

So, obviously, without these additional revelations that God has given to clarify this passage, it will be misinterpreted. So it comes down to one question: are the additional revelations given through Joseph Smith authentic? In other words, was Joseph Smith a prophet? And the only way to answer that question is by learning for yourself the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. That's what it all comes down to in this Church. Always has, always will.

The fact of the matter, though, is that for Latter-day Saints, heaven would not be heaven without our families. We were put into the families with whom we would be happiest, and God intends for that happiness to last forever. That's why marriage is so important.

Edited September 28, 2011 by altersteve

[Jesterss]

Paul does not say that "it is not good for men to have sexual relations with women," he is quoting something that was written in a letter to him previously.

And he didn't say that it was wrong. It was the teachings taught by the corinth church. He says that since it is happening, that it should be with their wives.

He never says anything about virgins. He says that those serving as missionaries who are unmarried or widowed are best off staying that way, for now.

1 corinthians 7:25... He does talk about virgins..

He doesn't say this. He simply says that the Lord has no commandment for virgins that he is aware of, so he gives his own judgment that "for the present distress," it is good for a man to be a virgin. What he meant by "present distress" is up for debate, but he was probably talking about a problem that was taking place at the time in the mission field.

No, he says that this wasn't a commandment by the lord, but one who feels they have the right to speak on behalf of the lord because they are an apostle, has the ability to give us commandments on what we should do to become closer to God. Present distress is up to debate, but the fact that he said what he said, is not.. if present distress was meant for just a few years, anyone unmarried and widowed, would therefore be unmarried in heaven, so what makes them any less than those who were married? nothing. point being, marriage cannot be the only way into the highest heaven of mormon theology. if Jesus tells us that anyone who leaves home, parents, wife, brother, sister, child to seek the kingdom of heaven will receive twice as much or "much" more then marriage to me, simply cannot be what makes us the best in Gods eyes. Marriage was instituted for our own sake so we would not be lonely...

If you're a missionary.

If you're anyone. The world in its present form is passing away, marriage is earthly. it is of the flesh.

This does not mean that a woman is no longer sealed to her husband after he dies, it means that after he dies she is free to marry another man.

Exactly, because death has done them part. The law no longer has any authority over them, it was an earthly law. She can remarry or not.

Same as above. This is only saying that if a woman's husband dies, she is free to marry somebody else. She is "loosed from the law of her husband," not from her husband himself. It is not saying that they will no longer be married in eternity.

The law is an earthly law. The law that bound them was earthly, therefore, if she can be loosed from it, they are no longer one. It's the same concept for the marriage as it is for the divorce. You can't say that the law in marriage pertains to eternity, but divorce is earthly. They are both of an earthly nature. Nothing more. The law is to keep you from being faithful to your spouse and providing each other children and providing each other company. You are refusing to understand what the law means in marriage. You apply it correctly for death and divorce, then you twist it that for the marriage part, was somehow one in spirit and eternal, rather than recognizing that the law of marriage is in the flesh and of an earthly nature. Not anything more.

In this instance, "one flesh" is a metaphor to describe the unity shared by a married man and woman. In the afterlife, they will continue to be "one flesh." Latter-day Saints believe that all things were created spiritually before they were created physically, and that there is no reason that something must be spirit in order for it to be eternal. We will be resurrected physically, not spiritually, in the life hereafter; we will receive immortal perfected bodies like Christ's, and our bodies will once again be united with our spirits permanently, since the lack of a body is considered bondage. Spiritual resurrection (being born again) happens in this life.

No, one flesh means that each others actions would have implications on the other. If the husband is a fornicator the wife is an adulteress. vice versa. Our actions harm the other or benefit the other. We agreed to become one in the flesh that we may do everything together in order to not be alone here on earth. And if you believe spiritual was first, what about 1 corinthians 15? the natural was first, then the spiritual.. not the other way around. Spiritual comes last.

Notice that it says "he," and does not refer to marriage. A single person joined unto the Lord is a single person. But said person can also be joined with somebody else.

Of course it doesn't relate to marriage, that was my point that you completely missed. If God intended marriage to be eternal, he would have stated one spirit instead of one flesh. As 1 corinthians 6 was to point out that one spirit would be the existence of one being unified with Jesus and God for eternity.

Nobody believes the meaning was skewed. It means exactly what it says. Those who had every chance to marry in this life but failed to do so will not be married or given in marriage in the next, and they will be as the angels. Plain and simple. This is 100% LDS doctrine, which adds, however, that those who are married in this life, by someone with the proper authority to do so, will continue to be sealed to their husband/wife for eternity, and they will become not like angels, but like God, and Christ was obviously teaching this or else the Sadducees wouldn't have asked Him this question.

You yourself posted that you think that the understanding of "people will neither marry nor given in marriage" is different from my understanding. So from each of our own perspectives, the others rendition is skewed. It all comes down to the interpretation of given in marriage. You say that the marriage will not occur because it occurred on earth and will continue. I say that not only will marriage not occur, it isn't a needed practice in heaven as God is our companionship.

So, obviously, without these additional revelations that God has given to clarify this passage, it will be misinterpreted. So it comes down to one question: are the additional revelations given through Joseph Smith authentic? In other words, was Joseph Smith a prophet? And the only way to answer that question is by learning for yourself the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. That's what it all comes down to in this Church. Always has, always will.

It doesn't come down to the truthfulness of the BOM.. it comes down to the truth in Jesus and God... simple..

The fact of the matter, though, is that for Latter-day Saints, heaven would not be heaven without our families. We were put into the families with whom we would be happiest, and God intends for that happiness to last forever. That's why marriage is so important.

Understood. That's why I think this topic is interesting. As you do as well. But marriage is only important because it's how we understand love to our finite minds. God has in store a much greater love, one that exceeds that of our earthly marriage.... Whether we have partners or friends or what not in heaven, I don't know. I would assume we have brothers and sisters, as that's the ultimate goal, a child of God, what interactions occur there is pure speculation. But I know that marriage was never spoken of in the bible as an eternal marriage. But that unity of us to Jesus and God is..

question for you to think about: do you think you will need to be married in heaven in order to not be lonely? or phrased another way, do you think we would be lonely in heaven if we aren't married?

[Jesterss]

and let me add a little more flavor to the one flesh idea...

1 corinthians 6

¹⁵ Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! ¹⁶ Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.”^[b]17 But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit.

Edited September 28, 2011 by Jesterss

[altersteve]

Yeah, I knew I shouldn't have said anything. Sorry, Jesterss (actually, no, I'm not sorry at all), but your feeble attempts at placing your own interpretation on scripture in order to "prove" us wrong is not doing anything. I have no need to comment on any of that, because I have already explained my position well enough, and nothing you can say will convince me otherwise, because I have the Bible, plus modern revelation, from which to obtain knowledge of the gospel. All you have is the Bible, which, frankly, isn't enough.

[Jesterss]

Yeah, I knew I shouldn't have said anything. Sorry, Jesterss (actually, no, I'm not sorry at all), but your feeble attempts at placing your own interpretation on scripture in order to "prove" us wrong is not doing anything. I have no need to comment on any of that, because I have already explained my position well enough, and nothing you can say will convince me otherwise, because I have the Bible, plus modern revelation, from which to obtain knowledge of the gospel. All you have is the Bible, which, frankly, isn't enough.

So you don't want to attempt my last question to you?

I mean, lets get to the real reason women were created, was so man wouldn't be lonely.. God saw Adam was lonely... so do you think you would be lonely in heaven if not married?

[Zakuska]

question for you to think about: do you think you will need to be married in heaven in order to not be lonely? or phrased another way, do you think we would be lonely in heaven if we aren't married?

I think God answers the question for you Jes...

Gen 2

18 ¶And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Matthew 19:6

6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Marriage was Eternal from the first.

Edited September 28, 2011 by Zakuska

[Jesterss]

That does not make it eternal, it makes it a bondage of one flesh... God gave the law to moses. The law stated that a man and woman should become one flesh and live according to that law, when the husband or wife dies, they were no longer bound by the law as Romans 7 states... Of course, God joined them together in marriage and Jesus tells them, do not divorce, because as we know, if they divorce, they will become lonely and they cannot marry anyone else, if they do it will cause each to be an adulterer... So neither of those speak on the level of eternal bondage... Just tells us not to divorce, unless the proper conditions exist, that was the topic.. it does not answer my question..

My question was asking if you believe you would be lonely if you were not married in heaven? Would you feel lonely in heaven with no spouse?

Edited September 28, 2011 by Jesterss

[Zakuska]

That does not make it eternal, it makes it a bondage of one flesh... God gave the law to moses. The law stated that a man and woman should become one flesh and live according to that law, when the husband or wife dies, they were no longer bound by the law as Romans 7 states... Of course, God joined them together in marriage and Jesus tells them, do not divorce, because as we know, if they divorce, they will become lonely and they cannot marry anyone else, if they do it will cause each to be an adulterer... So neither of those speak on the level of eternal bondage... Just tells us not to divorce, unless the proper conditions exist, that was the topic.. it does not answer my question..

My question was asking if you believe you would be lonely if you were not married in heaven? Would you feel lonely in heaven with no spouse?

Moses allowed Divorce. God did not. Eternal Marriage was the original plan.

Galatians 3:19

19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Heb 7

18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

Christ returned us to Gods original intent.

Edited September 28, 2011 by Zakuska

[Jesterss]

Moses allowed Divorce. God did not. Eternal Marriage was the original plan.

Galatians 3:19

19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Heb 7

18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

Christ returned us to Gods original intent.

Of course, Jesus got rid of the law, let's not leave out the end of Galatians

Galatians 3

²⁶ So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, ²⁷ for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹ If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

and we have Jesus in Luke 18:29-30 telling the disciples that it is ok if they leave their parents (single), spouse, children, brothers and sisters to seek the kingdom of god... are the disciples less than anyone else that they should stay single and not achieve the highest kingdom?

point is, we are one in christ, christ is our partner.. we are not lonely because we have christ... so again, would you be lonely in heaven if you didn't have your wife or husband?

[Zakuska]

Of course, Jesus got rid of the law, let's not leave out the end of Galatians

Galatians 3

²⁶ So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, ²⁷ for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹ If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

and we have Jesus in Luke 18:29-30 telling the disciples that it is ok if they leave their parents (single), spouse, children, brothers and sisters to seek the kingdom of god... are the disciples less than anyone else that they should stay single and not achieve the highest kingdom?

point is, we are one in christ, christ is our partner.. we are not lonely because we have christ... so again, would you be lonely in heaven if you didn't have your wife or husband?

Could you please explain for the class why Paul says that forbbiding to get married is a depature from the faith?

1 Tim 4

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

[Jesterss]

Could you please explain for the class why Paul says that forbbiding to get married is a depature from the faith?

1 Tim 4

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

Dear Class,

thanks for showing up today...

but seriously.. there is no interpretation needed here. It is what it is again.. There never was a claim that marriage was wrong or forbidden... I have never said that.. Anyone who did would obviously not be relying on the bible...

I think marriage is a wonderful thing and it was great of God to give us partners. Someone we could share our life with and happiness with. God understands our loneliness.. I'm married.. I don't forbid it.. I just don't believe it to be something that will exist in heaven under the same concept as you do...