SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Matthew 5:32

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

letsgetbusy

Quote:
Any sexual relationship outside the marriage of one man and one woman is adultery.


I may be misunderstanding what you are saying here but I don't think this is sustainable. While there is a case for arguing that 'fornication' (as used biblically) may include all sexual immorality inside or outside of marriage, 'adultery' would always mean the betraying of the marriage bond and hence really only applicable to someone within a marriage. So 'adultery' would be a sin 'within' marriage but 'fornication' could well include sin 'within and outside' of a marriage union.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/8/22 11:47Profile









 Re:

Quote:
Re: Matthew 5:32
by letsgetbusy on 2005/8/22 8:19:18

Adultery is the undermining of God's plan. Any deviation is adultery of the heart. If you have gotten off His path, you are undermining, or adulterating it. Any sexual relationship outside the marriage of one man and one woman is adultery.



Hey Philo,

Letsgetbusy has the Idea of marriage etc. right.
Just because he didn't use the word of your choice (#'s 3431 or 3429 or 3430), doesn't mean that he wasn't using 4202, that was above his post.

Maybe "the 'Spirit' of the law" should be seen in other's posts more than the {your} letter of the law.

G4202
πορνεία
porneia
Thayer Definition:
1) illicit sexual intercourse
1a) adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
1b) sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
1c) sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mar_10:11,Mar_10:12
2) metaphorically the worship of idols
2a) of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols


Philo ~
Could you or someone else tell me, were you appointed at one time or another to be an Overseer here ? I'm just curious, because I haven't seen any one else on here behave as you do ? I am still reasonably new here, so it is possible that I don't know all the 'inside' stuff yet, of who's who in the Zoo.

I know you have your own site and forum, but what exactly is your position here ?

Thanks if you or someone else could fill this half-newbie in.

Annie

 2005/8/22 13:18
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi GrannieAnnie,

Quote:
I know you have your own site and forum, but what exactly is your position here ?

Thanks if you or someone else could fill this half-newbie in.



Ron is not formally an overseer of these forums but has contributed tremendously to the content and subjects over the last many months. I personally have greatly appreciated his insight into the various subjects and it has been of great personal help to me.

I have been watching you two go back and forth and wonder if you know each other some how? Based upon what I can see you have a pretty good grip on things but I think you are a little too defensive. I've been there with Ron myself. I have learned to just take things in stride and pretend we are discussing these issues over a cup of coffee or something (I don't drink coffee :-P).

Iron sharpens Iron. If we keep the dialogue at a lesser tone we can all learn from each other. If not- we don't accomplish anything.

Have enjoyed your contribtions so far!

God Bless,

-Robert


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/8/22 13:53Profile









 Re:

Hi Robert,

Yes, I know you are on his Forum too.

It's more like 'years' more than months and I don't doubt that he's "contributed".

It was on the thread "Getting along with our Gifts" that Philo caused me the most hurt and grief and over something that had nothing to do with anything.

I'm sorry - I believe in speaking Openly as a "Family" and not through PMs, as I see it this way .... What is done out in Public, should be exposed or taken care of in Public, as Paul did with Peter.

Then on the Hunger for the Word thread, actually the title was "Teach a man to fish.....", he came after me again over something that was so silly I can't even fathom what ruffled his feathers, and no one else could either, but it blew the spirit of that thread also.

I could see if either of those threads were blatant Heresy, but the Gifts one was for the sake of Respecting each other and Unity and the Fish one was just to encourage folks to be Bereans .... so what was the problem with those two motives, if there was no Heresy in them ?

It not "defensiveness" for MYSELF that you are seeing, but for TRUTH.
I could care less what anyone says about me, as a person, I am nothing ... but when truth from "Anybody" is twisted and turned by hairspitting and the "heart or spirit" of the poster or the post is UNSEEN, that is what will cause me to get 'defensive' in "defense" of TRUTH and Unity.

I am learning a lot from many of the posters here and I agree, iron does sharpen iron, and I had done a big study on that one, because others on another forum were using that verse as an excuse to cut each other into pieces.

That's NOT what that verse was intended for.

No, we don't know each other as I believe you asked or wondered, but I may know you alittle, if you're the same Robert from TF, years ago ?

I'll PM you on that one or you could me,,, but in any case, I also have enjoyed your posts.


I too will jump onto a thread with what seems to be a whip (ha) sometimes, but only if it is a Major issue that could do big harm to other's.

But not to "SPLIT-HAIRS" and destroy or distract from the "Heart or spirit of a thread" as Philo has done with me and others.

I am not talking behind his back, as some use PMs for ... which God DOES SEE ... but I believe to speak in public and before the Body, so that people like you can come on and shed light, as the way the Body 'should' function.

I love posts from certain brothers here and just Read and glean in silence, to let their posts sink in.

But though I've seen several posts where I didn't agree with Philo or others, I kept quiet.

I won't go around to split hairs with anyone, like I said, Unless it is Very crucial to protect another from hurt.


I HATE CONTENTION AND IT MAKES ME LITERALLY PHYSICALLY SICK BECAUSE I AM PHYSICALLY SICK.

HA - Not yelling brother, just wanted to be sure that was known, by others, not you. :-D.


I cry for UNITY more in my posts than anything, even asked for that with Philo on that Gifts thread, but .........


Anyhow, Thank you for contributing here and thank you for being upright and honest with me and in public.... as it should be.


Lord Bless.

Annie

 2005/8/22 14:20
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Hi GrannieAnnie,

I understand. Yet, I know maybe sometimes Ron comes off that way, but over time I have learned that it is just how he responds to things.

My experience conversing with Ron has lead me to see that he has a good reason usually to challenge certain things we say even if to us it seems petty. I suppose he would call himself a 'pedant'. He especially has a history of being zealous over the use of biblical terms. This keeps the real meaning of those terms in step with scripture, and biblical concepts biblical.

At first, we had some majorly sharp exchanges. I have written tractates that took 4 hours to complete just the text and would log on and debate various topics. The insane thing is that I am shocked how closely we actually view topics once the [b]smoke[/b] cleared. I felt horrible as I viewed him as hostile to my beliefs, when in reality we shared many the same views.

Topics we frequently discuss include what the biblical concept of the 'flesh' really is. He will tell you he does not give answers, but explainations. Therefor I still don't know where he stands on the issues, I only know we have dug it out to almost no end.

His eschatological views are not in step with mainstream Tim Lahay or Hal Lindsay.

He is very very learned. I have mistakenly underestimated him before on many occasions. I don't do that these days.

I have enjoyed his teachings on audio also. You will find one of my favorite messages [url=http://69.44.157.77/sermons/SID1832.mp3]here on 'justification'.[/url]

Say, I have to ask, where does the name 'GrannieAnnie' come from? My wifes name is Anna.

God Bless,

-Robert


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2005/8/22 15:11Profile









 Re:

Hi Robert,

Thank you for taking this time with me and for the sake of peace and the Body, in general.

I'm sorry to take so long to answer. The phone rang, the cats are crazy and things got going here.

I have to admit, I didn't know the definition of your word 'pedant', and had to look it up in the e-sword's Webster's. Here's what it says ....

Quote:
Pedant
PED'ANT, n.

1. A schoolmaster.

2. A person who makes a vain display of his learning.




#1 ~ I'm cool with, and well, you can guess on #2 :-D .


I wish it weren't time for me to go get supper cooked, but I thought, I'd just re-post an appeal I made to Philo, from off of that 'Gifts' thread, to also show where my head/heart is at, as you've tried to do on his behalf here.

And again ... I sincerely thank you for your efforts on everyone's behalf here.
[u]God Bless you !![/u]

[b]Quote of prior post[/b]

One more explanation.

I have no intent to start a thread where anyone can not reply to.
I love open discussion, I just am a bit burnt out on Debates.

When I first signed on here, I said I had been on a Theological Debate Forum, thinking it would be fun, because I was brand new to Computers and all.

Then I posted here that, some doctrinal debates went on for years, Greek and all, and I saw, that even with Greek, people would find they'd disagree on transliteration, grammar disputes, etc. etc. ad nauseum, so after only one year on Computers, I went off line for almost 2 years, to seek God in the matter, because the lack of Love, and Unity, caused by these "debates", caused my health to go down... in more ways than one.

I had a phobia of Forums ever since, because those "debates" were such a bad testimony or witness. Especially when it gets into Greek, etc. because it loses the general audience or leaves out too many Saints from the conversation and know from the past, that even with the Greek, folks won't agree.

If someone came on here and denied the Deity of Christ, I would hope you (Philo) and I could work together to dispute that heresy. Or any other 'Major' Doctrine within our general Statement of Faith, but to just banter over minors, I can't do anymore.

It's not against you Philo, I believe, but as I've stated, "I believe EVERY CHRISTIAN on this site has gifts that we all need. And Greek, etc. leaves too many out and I like talking with all here.

I need fellowship more than most, because as I've said, I am disabled and pretty much homebound ... so it's 'not' that I don't want anyone posting with me .... It's just the opposite, I 'want' fellowship and love it, more than words can say.

But a certain post was made recently on this forum from someone in charge, that moved my heart and I felt comfortable with.

I'll quote it here ....



Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"These forums are not the best place to debate and look for controversy. But rather a place to come alongside each other and seek the face of Jesus."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



That was just one of the type statements, that attracted me to this forum.

Only if it's a 'major' doctrine, do I feel we may need to get into so-called "debate".

I'm a Pre-mil-Post-trib believer, but I won't debate that, unless someone asked me to just "discuss it" with them. Just for one.

I don't hold the OSAS belief, but I won't get into that arguement either. I don't think it's needed, but just that folks seek the Lord with all their hearts.

My burden is for Growth, Doctrinal Purity and Last Days stuff, but I pray to not battle on minors. I pray not to battle at all.

My only point here with this thread was, to encourage All posters, that they All have gifts (whether cesstationist or not, they still have gift-burdens),and to encourage that we consider that when we disagree, that 'maybe' it's just their gift's burden that is causing the disagreement, and not to judge them, as anything less than ourselves.

I don't know how else to explain myself.


For a change (ha) I've finally run out of words.
(now that's a switch :)


I'd just rather encourage each believer in their own gift, and leave this with 1Corth. 12:14-27

[b]End Quote.[/b]


And I thought of something funny for all of us, maybe even Philo too.


The very first post I typed on this Forum, on my first day here, I said, (about the bickering going on here, that they were discussing on Eli's thread under Announcements, I think) ... that we should have a "Locked thread" for those who bicker, so it wouldn't be out in the view of the general public.

Well, listen to this idea (funny) - How about we make some money for SI, and make a locked forum called the Philo-Annie Ring and if anyone wants to watch us, (do whatever it is that we do to each other), they can pay Greg $20.00 bucks, to get the code to have access to that thread.

You could be the bell ringer between "rounds".

Ha ~ Now how's that for an idea ?



All in good fun, my friend.

Cherio, pip-pip, for now.

Love,
Annie

 2005/8/22 17:33
Manfred
Member



Joined: 2005/4/4
Posts: 342
Continental Europe

 Re:

Quote:
Fornication was usually defined as pre-marital sexual intercourse, and adultery as post-marital sexual intercourse.



Ron,

That is my understanding too, but can it be substantiated by the Word ? I'd like to know.

Manfred

 2005/8/22 19:30Profile









 Re: Matt 5:32


Manfred,

Early in the thread, Ron gave a link, within which there are other links to previous discussions.

[url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=3334&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go]http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=3334&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go[/url]

 2005/8/22 21:41









 Re: Matt 5:32

Because Dorcas asked about Matt. 5:32, the word used in that verse was ...

G4202
πορνεία
porneia
Thayer Definition:
1) illicit sexual intercourse
1a) [u]adultery[/u], fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
1b) sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
1c) sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mar_10:11,Mar_10:12
2) metaphorically the worship of idols
2a) of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols


Strong's G4202
πορνεία
porneia
por-ni'-ah
From G4203; harlotry ([u]including adultery[/u] and incest); figuratively idolatry: - fornication.


:-? the definition hasn't changed since page 1, has it ?

 2005/8/22 23:47









 Re: Matt 5:32

Hi Annie,

I believed I had previously understood this verse correctly - in its cultural setting - to be a condemnation of [u]pre[/u]-marital sex. Manfred has joined, with the same understanding, so I am not alone. Yay! 8-)

I will come back with questions if the links don't clear them up.

dorcas said

Quote:
the way I read that verse ..... I see Jesus upholding virginity as a starting place for marriage

We know Jesus came to fulfil the law.

 2005/8/23 1:19





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy