F
felix
Guest
A wife is free while a concubine is not free.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Virginity testing.
- Thread starter Classik
- Start date
A wife is free while a concubine is not free.
F
felix
Guest
But Romans 11 is not a prophecy or promise for New covenant. Any believer in Christ becomes an Israelite and seek the heavenly kingdom. They in no prophesy for a "restored Israel" in NT apart from mentioning Jerusalem as spiritual Sodom and Egypt.
There is also another rather embarrassing genetic report of Azhenagi Jews are only 50% related to middle eastern origin but more related to Europe. There is no history of Azhenagi Jews before 11th Century. There is also a theory that more Jews intermarried Europeans for this behavior in genes. Also, other Jews around the world like Bene Israel, beta Israel don't match with Azhenagi Jews. There is also a tradition that St. Thomas came to Cochin to preach the gospel to the Jewish community there - who when tested today, don't match with Azhenagi Jews who are of 80% of Israel. If bloodline is no important for a Jew, how can you even say the prophecy is fulfilled when the identity of an actual Jew itself is in question ?
Last edited by a moderator:
Deborah13
Member
First let me say that two people who just decide to live together is not considered marriage even under common law and would not be legal. Living together does not a marriage make.
In your scenario I don't see they have too many choices. Say the young man is a trapper who the family meets and then the 2 wish to marry. If the father is a Christian man he could stand in as a pastor to take their vows but this would not be a legal union anymore than common law and he was not ordained by God as a pastor or a civil servant. If God does not see the marriage of the parents as being sanctified then what? Would her parents be justified in telling her she could not marry him under common law? And would God condemn their union?
Issac met Rebekah walking across a field took her into his mother tent and bed her, their commit was between them and God. It was what was in there hearts. It was not a trivial matter.
farouk
Member
Deborah:
Thanks for your considered comments. I think that today there is a social expectation (which Christians at some level would expect to abide by) that if a union of some sort is to be considered marriage, then a public registering of the marriage needs to take place. Even if it means hopping to Vegas and back, or whatever.
I think that Christian parents, whether up a remote mountain or not, would expect more of their daughter than simply to say to her and her trapper/ truck driver fiance: Okay, here's a Bible and some condoms. (I'm reminded of a line in Mr Smith goes to Washington, in the middle of one night: 'Hey, let's go wake up a preacher and get married'.)
(You know that I'm being hypothetical here, only; I don't think you are actually advocating these terms.)
Blessings.
Deborah13
Member
Common law marriages can be documented and registered at the County Court House although they don't have to be to be legal. I think people have misconstrued ideas about what a common law marriage is.
By the way. What do you think you would do if you were these parents on the mountain? Can you put yourself several hundred miles from the closest pastor/civil servant, with nothing but a wagon and a mule?
I have friends who had his uncle, who is a Christian but not an ordain pastor, preside over their wedding. Then they filed a common law affidavit at the court house. I consider them married as does everyone I know. We live in a very small community and everybody knows everybody and all their business.
I just looked up common law marriage on wiki, in Canada there isn't any real common law marriage. The term is used for cohabitation, etc. and is never legal. Not so in the USA.
"A true common-law marriage is a fully legal marriage that has been contracted in an irregular way. In the United States, nine states and the District of Columbia permit this irregular form of marriage. People in these true common-law marriages are considered legally married for all purposes and in all circumstances" wiki
Last edited by a moderator:
farouk
Member
Deborah:
I would (hypothetically, of course) want to know if the young man as well as the daughter was a Christian; I would hope that they would make every effort to put their union on a legal footing. It doesn't particularly matter to me if the officiant is a Christian or not; the legal status is important, I think. Now, for Christians, accompanying the ceremony (either during or after, someplace else) with prayers would be very good.
What I would want to avoid is the scenario: "Who's the guy? / Oh, he's the daughter's bf, or son-in-law; call him what you like."
And definitely would want to avoid the situation: "You guys better use condoms at least until you can fix having some judge or lawyer give you a marriage certificate."
Admittedly my thinking here is colored by my North American/European/Western experience.
(Do you see a flaw in what I'm suggesting? I'm not trying to be controversial or arguing for its own sake.)
Blessings to you and yours at this Christmas time.
Deborah13
Member
LOL I do understand what you are saying and I agree.
Blessing to You and Your's as well. Have a wonderful Christimas.
farouk
Member
Deborah:
You guys have a great Christmas with the family together!
So, re. the theme of this thread, I'm the first to recognize the sadness and regret of a premature loss of virginity.
But in the scheme of Gospel truth, it's whether both parties to a marriage are repentant and cleansed and forgiven of all sin, with faith in Christ, that form the basis of a marriage in the Lord.
The wondrous truth of the Gospel is that by grace the past can be put behind.
Blessings.
farouk
Member
Yes, indeed. Some unconverted people are virgins. Well, good for them, as far as it goes, but this won't earn on iota of merit with God as far as their salvation is concerned; rather, it's faith in the Person and work of Christ that reconciles them, which is also the basis for marriage in the Lord. Marrying in the Lord does not require viginity (even though the absence of psychological scars that virginity may bring can be an advantage to some couples).
Classik
Member
I have been thinking about this thread for a while now. Some have said: Once you are forgiven your virginity is restored to you. You are a new person before God. I agree with this: however (especially for women) that doesn't restore a broken hymen. And for the guys...whatever. Thank you all for your lovely contributions. (Please, I do not condemn non virgins at all - just that I believe morality isn't old-fashioned)
farouk
Member
Classik: YW. In the end, by the grace of God, it doesn't revolve around definitions of virginity, but rather on whether we are new creatures (2 Corinthians 5.17), cleansed by the precious blood of Christ.
Blessings.
farouk
Member
Classik: YW. In the end, one's approach to it needs to be informed by Gospel principles. Blessings.
farouk
Member
YW. Someone wrote:
'All of grace, yes, grace surpassing,
Such a portion to bestow.
But the love, all knowledge passing,
Grace has taught us now to know.
Love that bore the stripes and sorrow,
Love that suffered on the tree,
Love that shares the bright tomorrow,
With the loved ones, you and me.'
farouk
Member
farouk
Member
Classik: I think your statement was intended as a question, right?
The answer is no. ('Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid.' Romans 6.1)
Classik
Member
Oops! 'however' ppl shouldn't. That was a mistake. I was trying to write shouldn't. However and shouldn't