Solutions To The Dilemma

Several have commented on the previous post (both in the comments and privately by email) that I’m unduly harsh and don’t leave a way of escape.  That isn’t true, but that doesn’t mean that it’s easy.  In this post I’ll discuss solutions to the problem of rampant, institutionalized adultery within the church.

Keep in mind that the source of much of the problem here is the idolatry of Christians refusing to acknowledge that marriage belongs to God.  By ceding the authority over marriage to the State and refusing to teach sound doctrine the church has brought this upon itself.

Let’s say a guy’s wife separates from him, runs to the state and some judge issues a “Dissolution of Marriage” document under the no-fault divorce laws. Her offended husband doesn’t want to be sentenced to sexual starvation and looks for another wife. What’s really going on?

#1, The so-called divorce is illegitimate and she’s still married to her husband although (contrary to the command in 1st Cor. 7:10-11) separated from him.

#2, If she finds another guy to purportedly marry (in further violation of the command of 1st Cor. 7:10-11) they won’t actually be getting married- a married woman cannot marry another man because she already has a husband. If she does so she isn’t really married to him, they’re simply shacked up in adultery.

#3, Given that two married believers are forbidden to divorce, any such “divorces” are illegitimate and God won’t accept them (c.f. Matthew 5:32-33), so when the husband starts looking within the church for another wife, he has to exclude just about every so-called “Christian” divorcee from consideration.

#4, Any divorce initiated by a wife before she came to the Lord is automatically illegitimate because women don’t have the authority to divorce their husbands (except for the Christian woman who’s unbelieving husband left her, 1st Cor 7:15). This further reduces the number of women eligible to re-marry.

#5, Any divorce initiated by an unbelieving husband for reasons other than the unfaithfulness of his wife is illegitimate and God will not accept it. Likewise, any divorce initiated by a Christian man (except for the aforementioned exception in 1st Cor. 7:15) is also illegitimate regardless of whether his wife was unfaithful or not.

#6, Points 3-5 indicate the number of legitimately divorced “Christian” women who are actually eligible to remarry is remarkably small. So small, in fact, as to be non-existent. It also means that the prohibition of the wife returning to her first husband in Deuteronomy 24:4 does not apply, because that prohibition only applies if the divorce was legitimate.

#7, This leaves the offended husband with a choice between widows (not many, although it doesn’t matter if they have children or not), never-married women without children (usually damaged with unrealistic feminist expectations) and so-called “single-mothers.” It also leaves all those illegitimately divorced wives with the option of returning to their husband (the guy they’re still married to) and according to 1st Peter 3:7 he doesn’t have the option (as a Christian) of refusing reconciliation.

#8, Even in the cases in which the offended husband can find an eligible woman to take as a second wife, he defrauds her by claiming to be divorced (the implication is that the divorce is legitimate) and not explaining that his first wife is separated from him and IF she wants to come home she will be welcomed and he expects her (the 2nd wife) to stand there with him with a smile on her face to welcome the first wife home because at that point he’d have 2 wives.

#9, This leaves the offended husband in a rather bad position because there are very few women he’d want to marry who are eligible to re-marry and culturally these women reject the idea of anything other than monogamy.

#10, As we go down the list I’ve just enumerated, at some point both Christian men and women reject it out of hand. I didn’t make this stuff up, I’m just the guy that’s pointing out what God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ require of men and women, but there’s a whole lot of of so-called Christians who can’t accept what the Bible actually says. Their usual line of defense is “I don’t agree with that interpretation” but such arguments are childishly easy to destroy if one actually knows what the Bible says.

What does all that mean? There’s a whole lot of adultery going on out there.  If the believing wife who separated herself from her husband violates her instruction and shacks up with another man she’s committing adultery and as a Christian she has an obligation to her Lord to stop sinning. If the man she purported to marry as a “second husband” is a Christian he is under the same obligation to stop sinning by removing himself from the adulterous situation.

The refusal to do so by either or both parties automatically calls into question whether they’re even Christians and 1st John 2:3-6 applies but does not alleviate the sin, because adultery is a sin whether one is a Christian or not.

This brings us back to my point of my last post, that the Christian men are hypocrites for calling the women out on their sin but in the hardness of their hearts refuse to do what they were commanded to do; which is forgive, be reconciled to and restore their wife if she, in humble repentance, returns to him and desires reconciliation.

Solutions: I gave some hints, but I’ll spell it out. This is the solution for the wife who separated herself, has repented and wants a husband again without being in sin.

If the Christian wife who wrongly separated herself from her Christian husband realizes her sin and repents of her sin, she is to go to her husband asking to be reconciled to him. 1st Peter 3:7 is a command, stating “husbands, LIVE WITH YOUR WIVES” and as a Christian he doesn’t have a choice.

(Comment: What if she doesn’t want to return to her first husband? Well, recognize that God puts people in our lives to accomplish His goals and help conform us to the image of Christ. The irritations act to polish out the imperfections in the individual and if the wife is truly desirous of being in obedience to her Lord, she will obey Him even if she doesn’t have a desire to do so. In all likelihood the husband doesn’t want the wife back (probably having been traumatized and deeply offended) so one of two things will happen: Either he does want her back and the Lord wants that union restored, or he refuses, which means Christ is ready for someone else to take over the job of polishing up the wife and presenting her as “spotless and without blemish of any kind.” The wife is under no obligation to explain all this, she is simply to present herself in humble repentance.)

If the offended husband refuses to accept and be reconciled to her she is to give him time to think about it, then return with witnesses and confront him again. If he still refuses to repent of what is now his sin, she is to take it before the elders of the church. Under the authority of 1st Corinthians 5 and under the standard of 1st John 2:3-6, the church should give him the opportunity to make his case (he won’t, but I’m describing an ecclesiastical court) and if he refuses to repent should excommunicate him.

With such a judgment made, regardless of her sin (which she has repented of) he is now the unbeliever who left her, 1st Cor. 7:15 applies and she’s free to legitimately remarry. She should reflect on all the things she did wrong in her first marriage and try to solve those problems (entitlement attitude, rebellion against his authority, refusal to honor him and be submissive in everything, major weight gain, etc.) BEFORE thinking about being courted by and agreeing to marry another man.

Given the serious shortage of attractive high-value men within the church willing to marry a divorced woman (especially a divorced woman with children), the woman would be better off if she partnered together with one or two other Christian women who were eligible to marry with an agreement to offer themselves as a “package deal” in a polygynous marriage. Sounds crazy? Perhaps, but look at what’s available in terms of high-value men and what they’d want in order to agree to marry. I wrote an entire series of novels that started off with a group of three women doing just that. The research I did in writing those books really opened my eyes.

In such a situation the women (who had better all be Christians with a serious desire to be obedient to the Word in terms of submitting to their husband in everything) would be offering a package deal that provides the following to the man of their choice (if he’s willing to take the offer):

  • Marriage by covenant only with no license and no chance of divorce, no splitting of assets and no loss of custody of children.
  • Virtually unlimited sex, on demand, with variety and the option of all at once if he wants it. Why do I make that point? Because sooner or later the guy will want it. Men are like that.
  • Obedient wives who will hold each other accountable in their performance as wives.
  • One wife working at home, the rest working outside the home (could be rotated among the wives) means a higher household income than any monogamous marriage could provide. In addition it means a well-run home and children who would be well supervised and cared for. Homeschooling is an option with a SAHM so no need to turn the kids over to the state to be corrupted.
  • Socially, the guy with multiple wives is super high-status. This is countered by the fact that finding a church home with a leadership team willing to accept such a marriage would be difficult at best.

This is not to say that restrictions could not be placed on the offer.  If all the women are in agreement there are things that would truly offend their conscience and they believe such things should not be done, such things can be placed as restrictions the man must agree to in order to marry them.  One restriction might be “No X-rated photos or videos and don’t ever do it in secret for any reason.”  For health reasons they may decide on a restriction of “No anal intercourse.”  It’s all negotiable and he can either agree or not as he chooses, but we’re talking about things God placed no prohibition on, so this should be very carefully considered before making a list of all the things the wives would refuse to do.

Some women can handle that but most can’t and the question becomes why they can’t. The masculine Christian men willing to truly husband their wives are few and far between. Why a woman would settle for a much lesser man is beyond me, but perhaps that’s because such a man isn’t willing to settle for what now passes for “Christian” women. In other words, if a woman wants it all she has to be willing to give it all. They draw a line, unwilling to totally surrender and thus rob themselves of what they might have had because they don’t trust God.

Solutions for the husbands (although arguably far more difficult)

Prior to looking for another wife, he really should do everything possible to maximize his SMV with a focus on his attractiveness, game and earning potential. Hit the gym, lose the gut, learn game, maximize income, develop a life that a woman wants to be a part of, etc., etc., etc. You’ve heard it all before, just do it.

If the illegitimately divorced husband can find another woman to marry (he is entitled to take more than one wife) and is stupid enough to try monogamy after being burned the first time he MUST explain the situation to her. If she can accept that, great.

(Comment: What if the husband truly never wants to see that BPD/NPD landwhale of a wife again? The one who made his life a living hell for years, destroyed his family, alienated his children and used the police power of the state to extract money from him for years, perhaps even putting him in jail if he was unable to pay at some point? Well, sir, your sin put Christ on a cross, so consider that before getting all huffy about what she did to you.  Christ forgave you, gave you eternal life and accepted you into the body of Christ; so are you justified in refusing to forgive her and be reconciled to her?  Reconciliation is not a requirement to put up with her previous antics. Reasonable conditions could be put in place that she would have to comply with prior to a full reconciliation.

This could include a requirement to make public confession of her sin before the church, describing her offenses, why she was wrong and a request to be held accountable now that she is in repentance of her sin. After that, a requirement to lose the weight, submit to him in everything and help to repair the damage done to the children would go a long way to demonstrate she truly is repentant. Upon meeting such requirements a true reconciliation could be accomplished. But, and this is important,  they are already (and still) married as far as God is concerned and should not again engage in the idolatry of getting officially “remarried” in the eyes of the state. As far as the state is concerned, they would be co-cohabiting and she should work with him to get the state out of their marriage and cancel any child-support or alimony payments. That may require moving to another state.

Ideally he should seek out several women to marry in a polygynous marriage (far better than a monogamous marriage in this legal environment) because if he can swing that, explaining point #2 is nothing more than the same sauce applied to the first wife. I’ll repeat the point that in marrying wife #2 the husband will have two wives- not a wife and an ex. If you don’t like it, take it up with God. This is a win-win situation for the husband whether he wants wife #1 back or not. If he does want her back and she’s willing, great. If she’s not, he’s still getting his needs met and he can continue to pray for her. If he doesn’t want her back, well, keep reading.

He should explain to wife #2 (and #3, #4, whatever) that after they’re married they will visit the separated wife and invite her to be reconciled to her husband (clearly explain the door is always open to her if she wants to return) BUT now that there’s more than one wife, things will definitely be different. For one thing, disobedience, disrespect, dishonor and fighting between the wives will not be tolerated and they will be disciplined, if necessary, for engaging in such behavior. Further, group sexy-time with all wives present will be mandatory at some frequency or another. A PDA on the part of wife #2 toward wife #1 after that’s explained will probably totally creep her out. In the case of multiple wives, a few PDA’s between wives (while smiling at wife #1) is probably all it would take. The door is open but the emotional price is high, so the only question is whether she’d be willing to throw her pride on the altar and submit. Most likely the answer is not only no, but HELL NO!

If she’s “married” to another man she’s pretty much guaranteed to reject this completely, but regardless, in explaining she has a right of return the husband will have met his obligations and not have defrauded his other wife/wives.  Remember, Deuteronomy 24:4 does not apply in this situation because she was not legitimately divorced.  If she is convicted of her sin and repents (which will probably depend greatly on how dissatisfied she is with her current “marriage”), a sister in Christ has been saved from her sin.  If not, that’s between her and the Lord but the husband will have done his duty.

If points 2-4 are followed, it pretty much guarantees the 1st wife will never come back under any circumstances. If she does, it also pretty much guarantees she’s seriously in repentance and willing to be obedient. However, if she’s not willing to end the adultery, 1st John 2:3-6 applies and the husband has the option of taking it before the elders, the end result being that she is the unbelieving spouse that left him and he is free. The big question of whether she’s actually a Christian will be settled by her willingness to be obedient.

Problems with these solutions:

  • It’s extremely difficult to find a church that actually believes and acts on what the Bible says, which makes the “take it before the elders” solution difficult to say the least.  In reality the church would be in a difficult position because having committed the sin of idolatry by incorporating their church, they might be subject to some liability at some point by rendering such a decision (their charter doesn’t give them the authority to sit in judgment of their members, regardless of what the Bible says).
  • It’s extremely difficult to find Christian men and women who are committed to obedience to the Word, especially when they don’t want to be obedient.
  • The very idea of polygyny (which is the de facto and de jure status of any man married to more than one woman, regardless of what the State says) is anathema to Christians due to feminism (polygyny is as patriarchal as it gets) and the traditional wrong teachings of the church.
  • Taking a stance of obedience to the Word means not just going against the flow, but taking a stand that will anger and embarrass other Christians who are in sin. Rocks will be thrown.
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Crazy Women, Divorce, Healthy Living, Marriage, Polygyny and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Solutions To The Dilemma

  1. Renee Harris says:

    “major weight gain,”
    How much should a non pregnant woman weight?

    • Height-weight proportionate (HWP) is the general standard and it doesn’t have anything to do with how much men or women actually weigh.

      It doesn’t matter what the scale says and women shouldn’t weigh themselves. What they should do is get a full length mirror and regularly look at themselves naked. If their body doesn’t look good they need to do something about it. If they look good then it doesn’t matter how much they weigh because they look good.

      Proportion plays a big role in this because a woman with a DD rack can carry some extra weight on the back end and still be proportionate while a woman with the same size ass that only has a B cup will look like a pear.

      However, having said that and getting back to your question, the 5’4″ woman that got married at a svelte 124 lbs and later ballooned up to 200+ pounds is way beyond HWP and physical attractiveness… and that’s what I was talking about. The husband never would have looked at her, much less married her if she was that big back when they were dating.

      The problem for women is unless they’re dealing with a real jerk like me, a guy won’t honestly tell them what’s wrong with how they look or what they could do to fix things. Why? Because they want to get laid and don’t want to mess things up by saying something the woman doesn’t want to hear.

      Me? I’ve long ago been cured of that and while I won’t go out of my way to fat-shame a woman I’ll certainly give her an honest answer if she asks.

      “Toad, does this dress make my ass look fat?”

      “Honey, that dress makes you look like 7 pounds of sausage in a 5 pound skin. It not only makes you look fat but that VPL is emphasizing it. If you have to wear it go with a thong, show more cleavage and maybe then nobody will notice how big your ass looks.”

      [Toad ducks whatever she just threw at him and immediately heads for the door]

      “Where are you going?”

      “Out. Now that you’re good and pissed off I’m not gonna stick around and watch you eat a half-quart of ice cream. On the other hand, if you want to get over being mad and get some exercise I’ll stick around give you a workout. You’ll only be a little late for work.”

      “You are SO bad! I can’t believe you just said that.”

      *Big smirk* “But you love it.”

      • Renee Harris says:

        Why do you called yourself a jerk?

        • Actually, that’s a good question. I frequently say things that offend people (especially SJW’s), I honestly answer questions that according to normal social conventions I’m expected to answer with a lie, I don’t put up with “socially acceptable” BS and I call people out (especially feminist women and SJW’s) on their ignorant statements and inability to think.

          Everybody tells me that makes me a jerk or an asshole because I’m not bending over backwards to “be nice” to others. I call it a very low BS tolerance, but why argue?

          I’m also told I’m really intense, have a great sense of humor, am a great story-teller, and I’ve obviously lived a very interesting life. However, they also point out that my level of education (both formal and informal), combined with my passion for reading and research, means that I usually know far, far more about virtually any subject than anyone I’m talking to. That causes me come across as a know-it-all and/or arrogant. I’ve learned over the years to calibrate how much people can take, but I still get it wrong and pointing out someone else’s ignorance doesn’t endear me to them.

          Since I’m told I’m a jerk because of these things (which is a bit more polite than being an asshole) I’ve decided to embrace it and wear it as a badge of honor. I’ve found that if I start off identifying myself as a jerk, as people get to know me they hit a wall of cognitive dissonance because I’m obviously not a jerk to people who can appreciate somebody like me. As far as the feminists, churchians and SJW’s are concerned, I don’t care.

          • Renee Harris says:

            At AT I know a couple in a “marriage” with 2 kids. If shoe go back to her husband do the kids go with her? Or stay with dad? She can’t go back btw

          • I assume the woman in question was married and divorced, then married another man with whom she has two children.

            The first question is whether she was legitimately divorced.

            *If she divorced him, the divorce was illegitimate and she’s still married to the first guy.
            *If she and the first guy were both Christians, the divorce is illegitimate and she’s still married to the first guy.
            *If the first guy was an unbeliever and he divorced her for any reason other than her sexual immorality, the divorces is illegitimate and they’re still married.

          • Renee Harris says:

            Ok so I tell her to back to first husband and the kids stay with dad ?

          • I wouldnt tell her anything if I were you unless you’ve seriously studied the issue and know it well. Then, only after time in prayer.

            Most Christians reject what the Bible says in this area out of hand. They are in sin (adultery) but they don’t want to admit it and don’t want to repent.

            Let it go unless you really feel compelled to say something. If you do, send her here and have her read my last 2 posts.

  2. SFC Ton says:

    Forgiveness is one thing
    Bringing the hateful crazy train back into your life full time is another matter all together.

    You can forgive someone for stealing your livestock but that doesn’t not require you to entrust them with your property again, or remove their obligation for restitution. As way of example

    • Ton, this is not an envelopment, it’s a frontal assault and you need to call in an airstrike.

      The disciples were ordinary men but they knew what women could be like. That’s why they said “If this is the way of a relationship between a man and a woman, it’s better not to marry.”

      And that was back in the day when a husband was not just able, but expected to keep his wife under control and take her in hand when needed.

      I’d stack up my hateful crazy train against yours and I doubt there’d be a whole lot of difference, but the point is according to the book, if you marry her (as a Christian, mind you) you’re stuck with her. However, the question is whether she’s actually a Christian. Having left you she’s in violation of the commandment not to leave you as the commandment for her her to submit to you in everything (just to name two). I don’t know about you but I can add adultery to the mix on my end.

      So, follow the rules. Confront her about her sin. If she repents, great. If not, return with witnesses. If she still refuses to repent take it before the church and demand that they excommunicate her. That makes her the unbeliever who departed from you, 1st Cor. 7:15 applies and YOU, Sir are FREE.

      Your mission: Find a church in which the elders DO NOT suffer from terminal testicular atrophy and the people can still recognize the gross sin of the women using the state to abuse men.

      She can call herself a Christian all she wants, but as Jesus said “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19″I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

      That was a grant of authority to the church, which has the authority to cast out the so-called believer who is immoral. I should probably do a post just on this topic, but the rules are the rules. Again, the question is whether she is the Christian woman who separated herself and is remaining single, living a quiet and chaste life, or whether she’s the unbeliever who departed. If it’s the latter, you are free of her and have no obligation to take her back.

  3. Well Toad all this certainly is food for thought.

    I do think your point that God can grow you to be more like Christ in a bad marriage is sound. I have often pondered my paternal grandmother’s life lately. She married you g, during the depression, and from how she described it, it almost sounded like an arranged marriage. Her parents sent her to his parent’s home and that was that. My grandfather was highly intelligent, brilliant some say, but he was also a difficult man. He was in WWII and because his parents were Czech and he could speak the language he was sent to the front and helped liberate camps and what he saw and experienced changed him, he became a heavy drinker and a mean drunk to boot. He sometimes would abuse her and her children when drunk, spent many evenings at the local bar, and would even bring women home with him on occasion! My grandmother didn’t like it but she didn’t leave either. She attended church and found happiness and meaning in life thru their four sons and her work on the farm. My mother criticized her for not leaving and couldn’t understand but the more I think about it the more I admire her strength and obidence to God. Few would do it today. I wish they had a happier marriage of course, but I guess I am saying she was the type of wife you describe. I am proud of her.

    • I’m guessing she was born in the mid-20’s (if she was around the age of her husband) which meant she got married in the 40’s (probably after he got back from the war) and after twenty years of marriage that was the mid-1960’s when divorce really took off. That decade wasn’t like things are now, but the fact your grandmother withstood the obvious pressure to divorce him (and if he was truly as you describe there would have been pressure to divorce him) that’s kudos to her.

      You’ve got someone to look up to and 1/4 of your background is from her. Work with it and make her proud of you. It looks like you’re well on your way.

      • AT she was younger than my grandfather by at least a decade. I would have to look it up. Background, my parents met in 2nd grade and were childhood sweethearts etc, class pres, prom queen, he joined the ARMY, went to Bietnam as intelligence, but my dad died shortly after returning home on a boys night out w his war buddies that ended in a fatal crash. I was 2 at that time. My mom then kept me from my father’s clan bc of her judgement of them. So I know very little, unfortunately. I wish I had known them better, my grandpa included. Few (none actually) are perfect, but that does not make them unlovable. Blah, blah, blah but I believe in such stuff. And pigs fly, yeah yeah…

        We’d be we’ll to listen to the Book. It’s all there… Secretes of a life that works. Why people fight it I do not know…

  4. Vietnam. Sorry, autocorrect.

  5. Mycroft Jones says:

    Toad, when you were researching divorce in the Bible, did you reading David Instone-Brewers book, “Divorce and Remarriage”? He did valuable research. I don’t think you are reading the Bible right on this divorce topic; pending some astonishing oversight, David Instone-Brewers research is thorough and complete. If you’ve read his work, what objections have you found?

    • Hi Mycroft

      Yes, I’m familiar with the book and while he did some extensive research he started off with flawed convictions and then did a workmanlike job of eisegesis to back up his convictions. Keep in mind that anybody who writes the kind of stuff I write will NOT get published by anything mainstream.

      One of Brewer’s points was that Jesus specifically outlawed polygyny, which if true would have Jesus violating the Law (Deuteronomy 4:2) by subtracting from the Law. Once someone refuses to recognize that polygyny is a Biblically approved form of marriage the whole issue of divorce and remarriage goes out the window because without that, you can’t even know the meaning of the words “adultery” and “fornication.” I’m actually working on a post about that right now.

      Your contention that Brewers’ work is thorough and complete has been challenged by other theologians, such as Robert Gagnon, who mentions some of my major objections to Brewer (albeit for different reasons):

      http://www.robgagnon.net/DivorceInstoneBrewerResponse.htm

      Please note that I don’t agree with either Brewer or Gagnon and if I felt like it I could point out the absurdities in both their positions. The point, however, is Brewer wrote his book with an agenda and that agenda was to justify divorce for “emotional abuse” (which is tantamount to “no-fault” divorce) and remarriage regardless of the reasons for the previous divorce. Both of these positions are completely at odds with both the Law of Moses and what Jesus taught.

  6. Don Quixote says:

    Hi Toad, I found the following paper interesting. I know you like to do a bit of home-work so here it is:
    http://anglicanhistory.org/africa/colenso/polygamy1855.html

  7. Don Quixote says:

    P.S. Toad your blog is looking a bit risqué these days. It would have wider appeal to christians if you toned it down a little. Just sayn.

    • Actually, I did it to get rid of one person in particular. I’ll probably tone it down at some point in the future, but there’s a McLuanesque point to be made. None of the photos are NSFW although some are quite suggestive of things that would appall most Christians because most Christians don’t know what the Bible actually says and can’t be bothered to read it.

      I’ve been kind of reorganizing the blog behind the scenes and I started to write a major post toward that end last week. It’s now at 30 pages and over 14,000 words with no end in sight, but that post will be the backbone, with all the reference quotes and links for the various issues I discuss.

  8. Don Quixote says:

    30 pages is a lot [too much] for most blogs. Perhaps an ebook might be better. Or break it up into short chapters and blog it out that way?
    Anyhoo, God bless and all the best for the new year.

  9. Joseph Bleaux says:

    Toad:

    I have come to some of the same conclusions that you have regarding what is and is not marriage, adultery or fornication. I would go further to say that the “one flesh” concept used in the Bible references a spiritual entanglement, in addition to a mere temporal physical connection. Do you adhere to the idea of a “blood covenant” being created between a man and virgin when her hymen is broken through intercourse? I believe that God created our flesh bodies with a purpose . . . all of it, so it follows that the hymen must serve a purpose. It would seem to me that it serves as a means to create a once in a lifetime covenant/bond between husband and wife and keeps the woman honest about her chastity. Any thoughts on this?

    • Do you adhere to the idea of a “blood covenant” being created between a man and virgin when her hymen is broken through intercourse?

      Yes. I believe that’s what is being described in Genesis 2:24, because in Malachi 2:14, God is describing the wife of the man’s youth, his marriage by covenant. In context, it implies that the later marriage to a divorced woman is not a covenant marriage, the implication being that it’s because she isn’t a virgin.

      The reference to the man who desires Godly seed is especially telling in that respect.

      As to keeping a woman honest about her chastity, I don’t think there’s much that can or will keep women honest if they have the opportunity to lie, especially if it’s on something important. If you read Deuteronomy 22, one of the things that jumps out at you is the text is written in such a way as to assume the woman might be lying about being raped as opposed to committing adultery. Why? Because adultery is a death penalty offense for *her.*

  10. kronbergweb says:

    You declare that the offended husband if he refuses to take the adulterous wife back should be excommunicated; very well then, let us propose a corollary: if he wife does not repent of her sin within a time frame declared by the husband, let him, after doing the witness route, go before the church elders and have her excommunicated; she is now the unbeliever and has chosen to leave her Christian husband: what is good for the goose is good for the gander; God demands equal weights for equal measures.

    But the likelihood of the elders doing this against the woman is nil; hence, they are corrupt.

    • “Good for the goose is good for the gander” does not apply (Read Genesis 3:16 and Numbers 30) because the standards are different for men and women. Only feminists claim things are supposed to be equal between men and women and that is completely contrary to Scripture- which you’d know if you studied the subject. God never said equal weights and measures, but rather just weights and measures. There is a huge difference because justice is equal treatment for equals and equitable treatment of unequals. So-called equality is actually inequity between unequals.

      Husbands were commanded to love their wives as Christ loves the church. Since when does Christ decided He’s had enough and refuse to forgive someone? Wives, if they leave their husband, are commanded to remain chaste or be reconciled, they are not commanded to be reconciled. In fact, husbands are commanded to love their wives, but wives are commanded to honor, respect and obey their husbands… not to love them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s