Sex in Marriage Review of the Book: “Bringing Sex Home”

March 26th, 2012 |No Comments »

 

Bringing Sex HomeSex in Marriage … a Subject of this Review

The book Bringing Sex Home originally took the title: “Taking it to the Mattresses… Bringing Sex Home.” The expression “take it to the mattresses” is famous for its expressed use in the Godfather, the blockbuster movie that shocked America in the 1970s. That title is no longer the one used, as you can see. The author figured it could send the RIGHT MESSAGE to the wrong people. The right message is: There is a struggle in marriages, including Christian marriages, to enjoy … or even offer sexual pleasure to one another. 

Sex is a struggle for many different people, who associate it with something akin to a “lesser of two evils.” Worse, many people in our “sexually liberated” generation simply do not know how to please a spouse, much less do they understand the NECESSITY to do so. 

Sexual gratification is NOT about pleasure only. It is certainly that…most times. But, it is far more than that. For example, it is a means of cleaning a sewer, the imaginations   and desires of fallen hearts.  Here the author uses “fallen” to mean, our fall from innocence in the Garden of Eden. 

Here we use the phrase to note the STRUGGLE married couples have in bringing sexual pleasure to their marriages consistently throughout the marriage. Why the proliferation of affairs?  Why are men and wives said to be “bored” with each other? Why do Christians repeat the Early Church heresy that sex  is for “having children” primarily…That last word resounds like the toll of a mournful church bell sounding the passing of a friend into the next world, while his friends mourn.
 
Sex in Marriage … Primary Purpose for Sex

Sex is NOT primarily for “having children”.  Don’t get the author wrong. He knows some will use that to say, “Ah, you see, children are an unneeded burden after all, in our marriage.” If that is the meaning extracted, then they have missed the point.

Sex is a gift given by God for testifying FIRST of the UNION of a man and his wife.  That said, what exactly does it mean? A proper view of children flows from such an understanding. In fact, if that is NOT understood, marriage itself will hit the rocks. The good ship “Marriage” is foundering.  Too many pretend it to be otherwise. But, as a generation tries to “turn back” – fathers attempting to be there for their children, spouses attempting  suddenly to be attractive to the other, Christians “rediscovering” courtship, men attempting to focus on their wives, women trying to understand how to love their husbands (Titus 2:2) – without understanding the purpose of sexual UNION, all other functions of marriage will suffer.

This book is unique in that the sexual revolution and the marital expression and use of sex – each at designed to be at polar ends from each other in society – is approached from what God says – quite distinctly, even embarrassingly – about sexual habits and practices in His Word. Too often, “Christian counselors” run to  psychological theory ABOUT human nature (usually without handling sin, RIGHTEOUSNESS (the emphasis of this book) and judgment – John 16:8), as Christ Jesus told  us to do in the New Testament.

Sex in Marriage is NOT a “Lesser of Two Evils”

The book is designed with the purpose of helping Christians understand the fact that God gave sex as a gift to couples. It is designed as a REAL blessing…It is NOT designed as a “lesser of two evils” nor is it a test of abstinence, some sort of sadistic means of testing the resolve of married couples who tend to treat it ONLY as a means of having children. But then, once the children have arrived, what then? Is sex a designed blessing whether or not children are conceived?  It remains a blessing from the Lord for all married couples. It has many purposes. But, first and foremost it represents the power of the UNION of two people, now become ONE.

What does it mean that two people are ONE?  It certainly does not mean they become some mutant physical aberration. They are united in spirit and soul. The body is not capable of joining the flesh physically (like Siamese twins) to another’s flesh without intense tissue damage.  So, God gave us sexual intercourse as a means of teaching us that two are now one as a union. But, the Union is not a metaphor. God HAS made our spirits such that a real uniting in the souls of the two spouses CAN, and does, occur. Married couples are conscious of the need for fidelity in THIS RELATIONSHIP of all others. Infidelity in this – sexual intercourse – is universally understood as an injustice, and the living of a lie, the breach of a solemn (and holy) Trust. It is also an offense to God. 

Sex in Marriage: Satan in, Sex out

Sexual intercourse is designed to teach fidelity, exhibit kindness, serve the other in love, and display holiness. THEREFORE, it lays the foundation for the family, home and marriage. It is intensely PRIVATE…but a rebellious society increasingly wants it displayed more openly until it loses its character through cheap exposure. Satan, accordingly, continues to abuse its use, driving mankind to think of sex in terms as “dirty”, “cheap”, “filthy” and a mere plaything. Use someone, with their consent, and it’s thought to be OK. Remember the song “…Love the one your with.”  That’s society today. That’s even the view of churches, marriages and neighbors who live with wife swapping, adultery, “desperate housewives”, “needy” men, and broken, dysfunctional  families. The kids suffer in all of this as well.

The purpose of the book is not to explore history, drugs, or even porn (though it will be brought up in several places out of necessity).  The purpose is to explore sexual mores and the human heart. The purpose is to explore sex in its powerful capacity to knit the hearts and lives of married couples, to explore is true blessing and beauty. We are here to study why God made sex and what governs its purpose on earth. We are here to understand HOW God makes sex a blessing to couples. Yes, we must, just out of sheer necessity, “take out the trash” throughout the book. Sexual relations are so encumbered with associations of “filth”, that to think of the subject is to associate filthy, even criminal activities.

That is the way Satan is strategically engineering the subject, according to the Word of the Lord. Sex is equated to a FIRE. Like fires, good can come of  it. Evil can also result. Its association in our minds must always be one that is “guarded”. After all, YOU CAN burn your house down with it. YOU can burn your house down with sexual misguidance as well.

We all know how to strike the match. But this book is an attempt to teach us how important lighting the match really is.

…And more importantly, what to burn. 

-    Wayne C. Sedlak

Kindle version:  See the book, “Bring Sex Home” on Kindle!  That’s the Kindle revolution. Quite a novel way to get good books out to a thirsty public!
Regular downloadable version: Bringing Sex Home by David P. Jesse

(Citations from the Preface to the book, Bringing Sex Home by David P. Jesse)

Posted by admin | Filed in Marriage Preparation

Christ Divorced??

July 3rd, 2010 |No Comments »

Listen and hear how the Church, for 2000 years, has Failed when it comes to Divorce.

For the Marriage Plague Click HERE

 
icon for podpress  Christ Divorced? [9:18m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Posted by admin | Filed in Christian History of Divorce

Sexual Liberation and Revolution: the Costs

May 25th, 2010 |1 Comment »

The modern American sex industry began on the kitchen table of a small Chicago apartment rented by a 27 year old young man by the name of Hugh Hefner. No doubt, previous decades witnessed the advent of lusty pin ups of girls posing in swimsuits but Hugh Hefner gave the American public a new “genre” in sexual “genuineness”. He introduced an “…idealized midwestern vision of the girl next door, who was wholesome, friendly, interested in hobbies – and willing to take off her shirt.” The first issue of Playboy featured the centerfold of Marilyn Monroe and had a press run of 70,000 copies. Within a few years, the magazine’s circulation had reached nearly a million.

The Sexual Revolution, a.k.a. Sexual Liberation, exploded with vehemence upon the cultural scene in the 1960s, throughout America and the West. The term encompasses the vast changes in thought and ethics corresponding to changes in codes of behavior related to sexuality all throughout the Western world. As a result, the 1960s witnessed a new culture of “free love”, heralded by the hippie movement.

Like everything else in life offered “free”, there was a real cost involved. In fact, the costs have gone exponential in many fields of ethics:

- United States -Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)

Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700

- Pre-marital sexual involvement and the rise in divorce rates (including “churched couples”)

- Proliferation of broken homes and the children raised by one parent… a very difficult trial for the parent and the loss of parental guidance in all too many cases

- Public nudity, child involvement, and legal challenges

- The Pornography revolution

- Child sexual abuse and pedophilia

- Challenges to the Marriage Institution and mores

- “Alternative” sexual lifestyles and the legal challenges shaping the culture

- Feminism and the charge of escalating male violence; the culture of gender strife

All of this is, from the standpoint of God’s Law, just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. From the standpoint of counseling, one of the LEAST understood issues in ethics involves the subject of Sexual incontinency. You see, a funny thing (“funny” peculiar, not ‘funny” hilarious) happened on the way to sexual liberation: Sexual destruction.

Sexual Liberation and Revolution: Not so liberating after all Biblical counselors who take God’s Word seriously as the Handbook for a true Human Psychology and a true Sociology, have long been aware of the warning by St. Paul in I Corinthians 7. In that chapter he discusses the subject of sexual INCONTINENCY.

Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other … that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. – I Corinthians 7:5

The issue which is not realized is the “beyond the physical” PURPOSE of the sexual nature of man and woman. God designed sex as a powerful means of bonding two people’s spirits (or souls). Being married prior to sexual gratification is not designed as some sort of Victorian killjoy. In fact, historian’s inept reporting of the Victorian era’s licentious sexual promiscuity, nude beaches and alternative sexual lifestyles aside, sexual gratification is designed by God as one of the most powerful bonding acts created.

Being sexually active prior to the union of marriage leads to great danger. Stating the results before the proof here, it can be said that sexual incontinency characterizes a generation which has, “on again”, “off again” sex … Irregular at best and damaged relationships at worst. Sex was not made to be easily turned off. If a person has sexual play and the “tap” is turned off for whatever reason (which occurs in the vast majority of cases at some point, outside marriage, because distrust and selfishness set in), then the spirits of those involved manifest incontinency in other ways: fretting, distrust, nagging, fighting, unfaithfulness, accusation, fear, insulting, cynicism, and breach of the relationship. Put in other words, the government of the soul is now unstable and vulnerable to all sorts of abuse, deceit, strife and bitterness. A person cannot easily regain the government of their passions, emotions, thinking, purposeful endeavor, patience and virtues. They now face danger FROM their own conduct and FROM that of others.

Sexual Liberation and Revolution: True blessing instead

But, Scripture teaches us that the bonded union brought about by the sexual union (“Echad” in the Hebrew is “one” or “union”) of the husband and wife is designed for mutual enjoyment for the remainder of their lives together. Enjoyment is itself a means of establishing a relationship. People enjoy all kinds of things together, enjoying one another’s presence and growing together thereby. That said, sexual gratification goes beyond enjoyment, as rich as that is portrayed to be in Scripture. Sexual gratification is vital to a healthy physical well-being AND to the creation of a Union in two, now working together toward the governance of righteousness in the home and marriage. That is what is intended.

But… such blessing must be preceded by an obedience in world view, faith and calling. Worldview is that position one takes concerning beliefs united in a system concerning good and evil, God, purpose, virtue and ethics. It also involves the goals of such beliefs. Sex is vital in rooting nurture, care, and trust in the hearts of two individuals, husband and wife. Very little good can be accomplished among married people without trust and care. Sexual misconduct, including an incontinent neglect toward one another, is at the very root of the divorce plague today.

But, if the sexual precedes the marriage COVENANT, a bonded agreement in which stipulations, sanctions, purpose, and “ legal consideration” (wealth, assets, money) are pledged, then distrust can root itself from the beginning. The male generally “takes” and the female generally “gives”, and the latter expects the male to now act toward her with care. When that does not occur, or occurs in ways not appreciated or understood, she especially feels bitter and angry, a function of the confusion they created together. Sex teaches the heart (soul) of men and women TRUST, CARE and COVENANT. When that does not occur, when selfishness, “using” and a breach of the relationship are the results, people break down and become scornful. They harden and decide to use others as they have been used. Why not? “Everyone else is doing it”, is the thinking.

Sexual Liberation and Revolution: Defrauding one another

Interestingly, sex is treated in monetary terms by the Lord, a view perverted, but understood by the human heart in prostitution. That is the reason St. Paul speaks of “defrauding” one another when one spouse refuses sexual regularity toward the other regularly. This is so serious, that St. Paul says that the presence of sexual incontinency gives an opening to Satan, a reason sexual misconduct often devolves into discord and hate (inside or outside marriage), crime, abuse, pedophilia, violence, and death in society.

When husband and wife marry, Paul tells us that “their power” to dispense sexual favor is now limited (“not their own”) to that offered to their spouse… ONLY. That offer must be regular and heartfelt, engendering trust and love. The regularity is given to us in the form of “when such may be withheld” and answered by three terms given by St. Paul: mutual consent, a time of fasting and prayer, and then the willful return of each to “making love”, or as Paul says, “coming back together again”.

A clue as to “how often” is given by the opposite ethic: fasting. Such fasting was to be no more than 3 days in individuals fasting alone, though usually less than even that amount of time. Three days was the outside boundary. But, BOTH parties are to first give consent BEFORE one party withholds sexual gratification.

In fact, this is one place the Early Church erred grievously in ORDERING celibacy among officers and others in the Church. St. Paul prophesied in the first century that such a devilish doctrine would arise in the churches (and it did so in the centuries following). Living in the debauched era of Roman licentiousness, many in the Early Church overreacted to “sex”, treating it as a necessary evil, i.e., procreation. That view spilled over into marriage, and this devilish view of church enforced celibacy among officers of the churches – called by St. Paul, a “doctrine of devils” – became the mandate in many churches.

Sexual Liberation and Revolution: Incontinency

All of these views miss the POWER of sexual contact and enjoyment and, in so doing, devolve into a dangerous blindness. Incontinency is as much blind as it is intemperate. Why? People do not expect that sex has anything to do with the spiritual being of our nature. It is physical in its expression, but it nurtures the soul of man and woman, both of whom are deeply wounded when it is abused.
The word used by St. Paul for incontinency (above) is the Greek term: ?κρασ?α, pronounced akrasia. It means, “want of self-control, incontinence, intemperance” – cf. Lob. Ad Phryn. p. 524 sq.; [Aristotle on same]. Denotes “excess”: literally denotes "want of strength" (a, negative, kratos, "strength"), hence, "want of self-control, incontinence," Mat 23:25, "excess;" I Cor 7:5, "incontinency." Cp. akrates, "powerless, incontinent," II Tim. 3:3, RV, "without self-control."

In short, withholding sexual offers to your spouse is damaging to the relationship, placing both spouses at risk sexually, physically and spiritually (marriage, union, trust, love and walk with each other and the Lord). It is used by Satan to instill strife, distrust, violence in abusive language and criminal acts toward others.

The better way is for couples to nurture one another as Christian people, enjoying sexual gratification as God intended it, so as to nurture trust, love and care. Faithfulness and union will walk hand in hand with responsible marriage and family building and care.

Most especially, the government of the soul will be stable… not immoderately out of control. With the control of one’s passions will come also the control of one’s opinions and emotions. Such Christian self-governance is key toward felicity. Sexual continence isn’t everything, but it goes a long way toward healing the society torn everywhere by sexual confusion.

- Submitted, Wayne Sedlak, ICHR

Posted by admin | Filed in Sexual Revolution

Marriage vs Adultery

April 24th, 2010 |4 Comments »

Find the original article HERE… and immediately below. Our response  is below the article.

BEWARE!!! THE ARTICLE PRESENTED HERE IS NOT OUR ARTICLE! OUR RESPONSE TO IT IS BELOW THE ARTICLE!

The preaching of God’s word on divorce and remarriage is bringing many to their knees in sorrow. They are opening their Bibles and finding that God has never approved a second marriage while their original spouse still lives.

Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate (Matthew 19:4-6).

The sin arises when you have become one flesh, separate, and then join with another. For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. If while her husband lives, she marries another man, she is called an adulteress (Romans 7:2,3). To live as man and wife when one or both partners have previous spouses that are still alive, is to live in adultery. You are building a new relationship on a false foundation that Jesus calls adultery (Luke 16:18).

You desire God to forgive your first marriage so that your second relationship will stand. But it will not stand because it is built on adultery. You cannot expect God to forgive your original marriage, because it was lawful in the eyes of God. To return to God’s favor, you must repent of your second relationship and either remain single or be rejoined to your true spouse.

We are saddened by "families" being broken up over this issue. But if a "marriage" is being built on the foundation of adultery, instead of God’s foundation of being married "until death do us part," then the foundation is sand and will not stand on judgment day. Your original marriage is the marriage recognized by God. God made you one flesh for life because He seeks Godly offspring:

The LORD has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, with whom you have dealt treacherously; yet she is your companion and your wife by covenant. But did He not make them one, having a remnant of the Spirit? And why one? He seeks godly offspring. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously with the wife of his youth. For the LORD God of Israel says that He hates divorce, for it covers one’s garments with violence (Malachi 2:14-16).

We urge you in Christ’s name to examine your own marriage and see if it is based on the Biblical foundation of one man and one woman married for life.

If you find your marriage is not based on a Godly foundation because you formed a union while an original spouse was still alive, then you must repent of this "marriage." In God’s eyes it is not a marriage. It is adultery. If children were born of this adulterous relationship, they are born out of wedlock and are bastards. However, you are still responsible for them. There are many other concerns that must also be worked out. But the first step is to acknowledge the sin and then ask God’s forgiveness and guidance as you seek to return to His favor.

Scriptures on Divorce and Remarriage: Malachi 2:13-16; Matthew 5:31-32; Matthew 19:3-12; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:15-18; Romans 7:2-3; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Corinthians, Chapter 7; Galatians 5:16-21.

 

  Our Response

 

This is precisely the kind of disruptive, destructive "counsel" the "Marriage Plague" (book) exposes.

The Church goes ’round  and ’round on the issue (2000 years of carnage on the subject that most ministers claim they cannot reconcile in the Bible). This article ignores the key questions of the Laws of God, which Jesus was commenting upon. This is a good example of using the New Testament, ignoring the Law of the Writ of Divorce (Deut. 24: 1- 5) and just "pickin’ and choosing" which principles to cite.

Question: How can the woman at fault for uncleanness (sexual = fornication in the broadest sense/sexual "play"), ever "remarry" as the text allows her (the guilty party to do), if this New Testament hermeneutic is correct?! NO ONE answers that question! Furthermore, how can the woman in Deut. 24: 1-5 be able to remarry if she should be stoned (Leviticus 20:10)? This latter issue goes to the Old Testament economy without dealing as yet with the New Testament. In other words, was there an inconsistency in the OLD Testament? (Of course not, but how?! – The answer to that question is THE ISSUE over which the whole is broken wide open for understanding.) The point is, it doesnt APPEAR to be CONSISTENT, does it? Now, without answering that to begin with, Christians go to the New Testament and begin to "backwash" their commentary from New to Old ON THE VERY WRIT Jesus was talking about, not knowing HOW the Old Testament applied the Writ in the first place.

Then the questions become 1) "How is one put to death for adultery?" and 2) "What are the grounds for divorce?" Christians, like the article-author, refuse to address these crucial issues: 1) Are there other "death penalties"? [- Yes there are.] 2) Is desertion, abandonment, rebellion, abuse (toward male or female), sexual defrauding, unbeliever forcing the other to leave the home, believer-unbeliever relationships under some conditions (See Nehemiah), jeopardy/abuse of the children, blasphemy, unbelievers’ sexual sins without actual intercourse (porn, for example), … and others… grounds for divorce? [Yes, they can be.]

In the case of two unbelievers, most reformed theologians agree you do not tear up the second marriage, especially if you are now Christian. There may be a price to pay by God’s hand, but we cannot say the two should then divorce. Deut. 24: 1-5 allows remarriage to another and forbids going back to the original spouse as an abomination to God if the sinful spouse has remarried!

This is a basic, brief answer. NOTE: articles like this do more damage to society than people think. The reason? People like that are like a child with a chain saw in hand… nothing but carnage results. The great danger is missed: Deuteronomy 24 DEFINITELY makes the point that going back to the original spouse for marriage AFTER BEING REMARRIED (thereby divorcing the new spouse who also must be answered for!) … is an ABOMINATION to God.

I am out of time today… this is a brief…" tip of the iceberg" type of reply for now.

Posted by admin | Filed in Christian History of Divorce

Who Signs a Marriage Contract???

June 7th, 2008 |1 Comment »


Proper legal counsel can give you the particulars to any contract, including the signatures needed in our legal system today (for a prenuptial / marriage contract). Many lawyers do not prefer to do this. But, you may persist in finding such counsel. Obviously, you need good legal counsel, as contracts such as this can be breached in the courts, due to their often poorly structured and/or unenforceable character.

In Scripture, the covenant is established by sworn oath (the pledged word of the parties to the marriage). Witnesses can help the contract become enforceable.

In addition, the father who gives his daughter, is a signatory as witness. Scripture mandates his sworn oath concerning a number of issues such as Deuteronomy 22:15 – 17 – This passage is designed to hedge her claim to chastity – which in turn, is both physically/financially protective concerning good health, hygiene, and safety , and spiritually protective as per Scriptural concerns about emotional stability, (in)continence and faithfulness; Numbers 30: 1- 5, is another example. This passage is NOT arbitrary. It is a general provision worded in such as way as to be applied to several circumstances. It is not given to frustrate the right and desire of a legitimate Christian marriage union. Quite the contrary. It is designed to protect Christian marriage. [That cannot be fully "flushed out" here. See Marriage Plague for more thorough treatment of these kinds of issues.]

When applied to marriage, Numbers 30 is designed to uphold and protect 1) Leviticus 18 – laws of consanguinity and affinity; 2) protect the daughter in particular against abuse; 3) protect against marriage with unbelieving (non-Christian) partners.  4) Scripturally, his oversight is also designed to enjoin inheritance and dowry provisions. 5) Also, the father testifies to the integrity of his daughter’s faith and faithfulness. 6) If chastity is already a lost issue, the father testifies that the spouse knows all such as the father knows, so that there are no secrets going into the marital relationship. 7) If the father refuses to be a witness (will not give his blessing – his oath of agreement), that fact should take the issue to the Church court. [Too much to flush out here or now. Read Marriage Plague for more on these issues.]

Other family members, and the elders of a church with the presiding minister, can also be witnesses to the contract. That means the presiding Church court members have examined the marital couple’s claims to be wed, and approve.

Again, however, (please forgive the necessity of stating this – but that is the nature of the society we live in today) given the nature of state laws involving marriage, know what is demanded by law, so you know what you must face. Proper legal counsel can give you that information, though the object of attorney involvement is often to subject the marriage to statutory regulations which gives authority to the state to be a contracting party to the marriage. Do your "due diligence" and seek proper legal counsel. Learn to ask the right questions as to your rights, protections, and obligations.

This issue does take research. Marriage is the second most important decision you will make. (Our response to the call of Jesus Christ is the first, most important.). As such, marriage should be entered with sobriety and planning. (See Marriage Plague for the pre-marital events that can shape future divorces. It will sober you… or sicken you. But, it will also show WHY and HOW divorce ravages the churches.).

- submitted Wayne Sedlak, ICHR

Posted by admin | Filed in Marriage Preparation, Who Can I Marry?

Christian Divorce Confusion…

May 31st, 2008 |No Comments »

The Marriage PlagueChristian Marriage, an Essential Right

Scripture empowers a fundamental right of all parties to marry or remarry with only three limitations:

  • Disallowing “Christian marriage” in any claim of a believing Christian to marry a person who is not a believer.
  • Disallowing “Christian marriage” in the breach of the laws of affinity (Lev.18).
  • Disallowing “Christian marriage” in any breach of the laws of consanguinity (you cannot ever marry your parent, a sibling, an aunt, an uncle – direct, blood relationship). These hygienic laws have been one of the cornerstones of Western civilization for two millennia, yet few Christians know these laws concerning Christian marriage prohibitions even exist (Lev. 18).

 

State licensure laws violate Biblical injunctions concerning Christian marriage and Christian divorce (seek competent spiritual and legal counsel to handle this issue if necessary). That explains how the same sex issue has such legal power. The Bible does not authorize the state to legitimize marriage. It does give the state the authority to deal with divorce, violation of consanguinity, and affinity according to the civil mandates given in Scripture.

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers… – Romans 13:1

For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid …– Romans 13:4

For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. – Romans 13:9

This latter verse agrees with Deuteronomy 24:1ff allowing even the adulteress to remarry. It is explicitly stated there.

That does not mean she got off without sanction. The Old Testament “put to death” individuals in such civil matters by disinheritance (Adam and Eve for example were cast out of the Garden as a direct consequence of Christ’s warning “In the day you eat thereof, you will surely die.”).

Adam physically died over nine centuries later. But, he and his wife were “put to death” by being exiled (disinherited from Paradise) that very day.

This fact explains a number of issues:

  •   Christ did not endorse the stoning of the woman taken in adultery.
  •   Nor was He denying Moses in the case.
  •   There was no record of an adulterer being put to physical death in the Old Testament.
  •  The two harlots (harlots are adulteresses in the Bible) who stood in court before Solomon as known harlots were not put to death then or later.
  •  When God divorced Israel in the Old Testament (Jer. 3:8), Israel was exiled (sent into Captivity).

 Yet, God “remarried” Israel and brought His people back into His married relationship with Himself.

If we deny the right to Christian marriage (which includes remarriage), as specified in the Scriptures, we are culpable of violating St. Paul’s prophetic injunction in I Timothy 4: 1 – 3. We may be unwittingly participating in a “doctrine of devils”.

Please refer to The Marriage Plague for more information

- submitted by Chrys Ostom

Posted by admin | Filed in Who Can I Marry?

Christian History: The Early Church and Virtue

April 21st, 2008 |No Comments »

Edward Gibbon, in his classic work, the Decline and fall of the Roman Empire, once wrote:

“The primitive Christian demonstrated his faith by his virtues…” and as a result, won the heart of the culture.

Gibbon wrote that that single factor helped bring cultural influence and victory to the Church of Christ against the Roman Empire in the 4th Century AD.1

1) Christian history and the obedience of Christians: Such obedience rendered to the Lord is designed to actively portray principle and way of life higher and wiser than anything known to mankind naturally. Its values outshine all other systems of “morality” put together.

As a result, Scripture tells us that each Christian is to be a distinct “sign” and a “wonder” of Christ to society round about them. In other words, our Christian life credentials our Christian message, despite our sinful nature. This credentialing has moved our Christian history among the nations for the last 2000 years.

One example: the Christian history of the church records the fact that Afra of Augsburg, a former prostitute, repented of her sinful way of life and embraced Christ, she set up an orphanage for abandoned children of prisoners, smugglers, slaves, and thieves. Later, she became even more efficient in her love for these children by setting up a network through the churches for finding and putting them out for adoption.2 She very much represents the adage: “It’s not so much the presence of sin in life as it is the absence of repentance in the heart that distinguishes a bad man or woman from an upright one.”

The Roman state resented her work, especially since the “perception” was created by the propaganda of state agencies persecuting her saying that she was aiding and abetting “enemies of society” by helping these children… and saving children whom the state could only wish would “better” serve it as “productive” slaves.

So, the reality was that her activities put anything else to shame, including Roman “morality”. More to the point, she was caring for children who, in the eyes of slave masters and Roman rulers, could be put to work in places such as the Roman sulfur mines. That was money out of their pockets as far as they were concerned.

Afra was murdered by the Roman police state in the infamous persecution of Diocletian which began in the year 303 A.D. and extended over the next 10 years, the worst persecution to that date in the Christian history of the church.

2) Christian history and cultural institutions: Gibbon’s principle described far more than individual heroics throughout Christian history. Christians, he noted, are invariably moved to build institutions which makes their work more efficient and powerful.

Several such institutions, such as marriage and the family, are second nature to the creative impulse of Christian people. Christians have built schools, businesses, clinics, media, hospitals, charities, ministries of all types.

For example, the great 4th Century minister, Basil of Byzantium, built leper’s colonies for the humane medical treatment of lepers. His work drew the ire of many Roman aristocrats but such health care works undertaken by Christian people and churches glorified the Name of Christ.

In other words, Christianity is a new kind of civilization, not just a way to heaven. But, also, the way to heaven is credentialed by the quality of life and testimony we have shown throughout the Christian history of the church.

3) Christian history and deep societal reform: But Gibbon’s observation goes even deeper. Christ’s people bring a way of life that exposes and displaces a contrary civilization. For example, Telemachus of Laddia undertook the celebrated reform that eventually brought an end to the cruelties of gladiatorial combat in the arena. He was martyred in the arena for his work.3

The arena was used by the Caesars as a means of “corrupting the masses” for support and power politics. Cicero, the Roman Senator once described the real power and agenda of the arena. He said:

Setting out to seek power, and unable to gain their objectives by their own resources, they use every means to bribe and corrupt the masses. Then again, when they have rendered the many greedy for public benefits through their insane appetite for prestige, it evolves into a state of government by force. Once the people are accustomed to feeding off the property of others…they find a champion who is ambitious and daring, who brings the rule of force to completion carrying out murders, exiles and redistributions of properties – until, having come to live in the manner of beasts – they find a tyrannical master and monarch.4

4) Christian history and Christian virtue: Barlaam of Antioch, a humble shoe maker, represents yet another valuable lesson. As an infant boy, he had been rescued by Christians from the horrid Roman practice of placing unwanted children at a place just outside along the wall of the city designated by Roman law. There roving packs of dogs would find an easy meal. The historian puts it this way:

Barlaam of Antioch was a cobbler for the imperial forces who devoted all his free time to the care of orphans and widows in his church. Because he himself had been saved from the infanticide wall outside the city, he was especially concerned for exposed children. Even though he was not a pastor or church leader, his good deeds were so widely known that the enemies of the faith sought to have his witness silenced. During the calamitous persecution in 304, they succeeded in having him martyred.5

These virtuous lives – and many like them – won the culture.

Such a faith represented a wise and upright view of life in a corrupt world, which even the agnostic Edward Gibbon could see and admire.

Today, maintaining that heritage is the calling of the Christian faith as it stands poised to render its assistance to a beleaguered culture. Today, the sacred bond of marriage is “on trial” in our society. The issue of divorce among Christians has led to chaos in the churches and devastation in the homes.

But, Christians aren’t speaking out as they should. Scripture tells us pointedly, “As a trampled spring or a polluted well so is the upright who give way before the wicked.”

You can speak out. Leave your comment here!

- Chris Ostom

  1.  Gibbon, Edward. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Vol. 1. (Milman edition. The John C. Winston Co., Philadelphia, 1788) p. 543.
  2.  Grant, George. Third Time Around. (Wolgemuth and Hyatt Publishers. Brentwood, Tennessee, 1991) p. 28.
  3.  Grant, George. Third Time Around. (Wolgemuth and Hyatt Publishers. Brentwood, Tennessee, 1991) p.29.
  4.  Beacham, Richard C., Spectacle Entertainments of Early Imperial Rome (Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. 1999) p. 46.
  5. 5 Grant, George. Third Time Around. (Wolgemuth and Hyatt Publishers. Brentwood, Tennessee, 1991) p.28-29.

 

Posted by admin | Filed in Christian History of Divorce

Marriage Plague: Why Divorce in Christian History

April 21st, 2008 |No Comments »

Too many of us in the Christian community speak of the divorce itself as if it were the dominating problem we face in the breakdown of marriages among Christians. What if the problem is not divorce, per se? Maybe we are looking for solutions in all the wrong areas. Maybe something is wrong in our marriages. Divorce, like death, is a problem. But, the “cure” must concentrate on the “CAUSES”, not as much the results, if we are to change the way things are going in Christian marriages.

Perhaps, one of the problems is the way we “use our Bibles” in dealing with a case of divorce – and the steps leading up to it. In other words, our (mis)understanding of the Bible sends us in wrong directions. A glaring symptom of this very issue is the fact that many Christians throughout Christian history quote the Gospels concerning divorce but do not recognize our Lord is commenting upon Deuteronomy 24:1ff, enforcing its tenets.

Why Divorce in Christian History: Deuteronomy 24

Deuteronomy (one of three books of the Old Testament quoted/referenced most often by Christ Himself) commands us as to how to handle the rebellious in a divorce situation. But current Christian culture shies away from the “Law” of God, where Christ did not. In fact, in Luke 16, where Christ speaks of the Law as never perishing nor in any manner passing away, the very first illustration used is Deuteronomy 24:1ff.

Throughout Christian history, poor interpretive principles and understanding has been a continual source of strife and culture “plague” (ongoing social strife and hurt).

Why Divorce in Christian History: The Early Church & Interpretation

Let’s illustrate. For the first three centuries of the Christian era, many in the churches did not know how to describe/understand Christ’s two-fold nature as both fully God and fully man. They didn’t know whether to define Him from the Bible as …

  • two persons in one body (Nestorianism)
  • one “mixed” person with a different nature than anyone else (God mingled with flesh) (Eutychianism)
  • a lesser divinity with manlike characteristics (Gnosticism)
  • a phantom like being (Gnosticism)
  • a finite man of outstanding character (rationalism)

The problem was, they all used Scripture to justify their positions.

Note that. They used a poor understanding of the Word of God to define Christ.

Why Divorce in Christian History: Interpretations Leading to Abuse Read the rest »

Posted by admin | Filed in Christian History of Divorce

Avoiding a Christian Divorce: Calling and Marriage Fulfillment

April 21st, 2008 |No Comments »

Drawing on Proverbs 31, here are some goals to “think upon”. Few marriages can attain ALL of the following and most marriages will take years to pursue these. Certainly, they are NOT all pursued all at once:

1.A business profitable enough to grow with and toward the goals of their lives. Christian divorce in our culture is caused most often by financial concerns, not necessarily from “sex” issues.

2.Christian divorce as a phenomenon occurs very often because couples weary of endless labors to “get ahead” but don’t seem to do so. So, one of them usually “pulls the plug” on the relationship. Invested profits to expand their reach as a couple (“with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard”). Investments are God’s REPLACEMENT for slaves. Instead of mankind enslaving people to work and exploiting their labor and controlling their substance and future, investments go to work, putting capital in place of human servitude so as to build up wealth. Investments work 24/7, they never tire, and they continue building over time.

3.The husband of the woman of Proverbs 31 is in position in the gates to maintain justice is expressly placed WITHIN and surrounded by her economic activities. (That is deliberate Hebrew syntax and usage. When a Hebrew writer wants to tie in another subject and relate it to the one he is writing about, he artfully embeds the new subject into the framework of the older subject matter he is developing. Everyone then knows they are related.). The point is simple: Christian divorce – or divorce in general – is a phenomenon associated with injustice in the laws and courts of the land.

4.The family is known for its charitable attitude toward employees (servants here). Nothing gives a better reputation to an employer than kindness and fairness toward employees. Christian divorce would be much lower in our culture if a churches were far more charitable biblically while understanding divorce precursors specifically. Why? Support is often needed to help those beginning their marital distresses. Charity in the Bible includes many issues (monetary and non-monetary).

5.The family raises and educates the children with purpose and vision. Else they wouldn’t praise her. The opposite attitude is spelled out in Proverbs as the scorner or mocker. There is none in Proverbs 31. So, they have provided a trained generation to carry on their legacy and provide an inheritance. That training can be one of the most powerful preventatives to the Christian divorce problem in our churches.

6.They are involved in charity toward the poor of the land. Undoubtedly, they approached charity as Boaz and Ruth did in the Book of Ruth. Presumably, if there were aged parents involved (none mentioned), they too would be under the care of this family. Note, in the case of Ruth and Boaz, Christian charity done biblically, provided for reciprocity in a growing relationship that eventually became a Christian marriage … as opposed to the plague of the so-called Christian divorce spirals escalating daily.

7.They left a legacy of Christ like character and invested that character in the community which is really the most powerful means for preventing the kind of Christian divorce epidemic we have today among Christians.

8.Her Christ like character elevated the position of women – and marriage – in the eyes of society.

9.Honor, truth and honesty prevailed in society, which encourages everyone and replaces graft, dishonesty and malice – all of which are at the heart of Christian divorces today.

10.All they accomplished was done for the Lord’s kingdom and glory.

Oh, yes, and there was no divorce here because there WAS NO PLAGUE…MARRIAGE PLAGUE was replaced with righteousness to the glory of the King of Righteousness. Their marriage had and fulfilled that purpose.

- Submitted ICHR

Posted by admin | Filed in Calling

Listing: The Laws of Consanguinity and Affinity

April 21st, 2008 |No Comments »

Leviticus 18: 6- 28

These are the listings of the Laws of Consanguinity and Affinity…Leviticus 18

No civilization has survived without them.

Laws of Consanguinity and Affinity

None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.

The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

The nakedness of thy father’s wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father’s nakedness.

The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.

The nakedness of thy son’s daughter, or of thy daughter’s daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs is thine own nakedness.

The nakedness of thy father’s wife’s daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s sister: she is thy father’s near kinswoman.

Consanguinity refers to the “blood ties” (“kinship” by blood relationship). “Affinity” references illicit relationships, not blood and kin issues.

Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother’s sister: for she is thy mother’s near kinswoman.

Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s brother; thou shalt not approach to his wife: she is thine aunt.

Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter-in-law: she is thy son’s wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy brother’s wife: it is thy brother’s nakedness.
Read the rest »

Posted by admin | Filed in Who Can I Marry?

« Previous Posts