Here are excerpts from Ray to answer questions that may arise from what was posted, this first is a more complete thought concerning Ray comment "Sex and love has nothing to do with the definition of marriage."
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,5675.0.html --------------
Now maybe a more important question would be, is love required to make a marriage? [No] Right on, no. Love does not even enter into the definition of a marriage. It does not. Proof… how many arranged marriages have been in the world? Millions. Do most of them when they get an arranged marriage, love each other? They don’t even know each other.
Does sexual union have to be involved, in the definition of a marriage? [Unless it is consummated, you can annul it, right?] How long do you have to do that? Two years, eight years? Now we are putting time limits on it.
Sex and love has nothing to do with the definition of marriage. Nothing to do with it and I’m going to prove it to you. So What is marriage? We are going to find out. Get ready for a revelation, because this may not all be what you think it is.
v
TERMS OF MATRIMONY
MARRIAGE: Gk. gamos - NUPTIALS, marriage, wedding. The CEREMONY and its proceedings including the ‘marriage feast.’
That’s the definition of marriage right out of the Bible. Now do you see sex, intercourse, or love in there? No. Let’s read it again, nuptials, marriage, wedding - the ceremony. CEREMONY… I want to show this to you over and over and over again, it will blow you away, it’s the ceremony and it’s proceedings, including the marriage feast or the marriage supper or what we call in the western world ‘the reception.’
NUPTIALS: Noun; ‘A wedding CEREMONY’ (Webster’s Dictionary). Adjective; ‘related to marriage or the wedding ceremony.’
That’s the first definition by Dr. Strong, it is nuptials. It has nothing to do with having intercourse, loving each other, or producing children, nothing. It means a wedding ceremony.
The reason I decided to do this study, is because this person (email) is so hung up on the fact that ceremony has nothing to do with marriage. The fact of the matter is, what he thinks is marriage has nothing to do with the definition of marriage, 180 degrees opposite direction.
You can just go through dictionary after dictionary and Strong’s and you can look up all the words; marry, marrying, marriage, matrimony, look them all up, they all cross reference, they all produce the same truth… the wedding ceremony.
WEDDING: ‘The act of marrying, the CEREMONY of a marriage.’
It’s the definition of wedding, nothing to do with living together, rearing children, loving each other, having sex… nothing. Marriage is ‘gamos’ in Greek and marry is ‘gameo.’
MARRY: Gk. gameo - ‘to WED, unite a man and woman in wedlock.
What is a wedding? The act of marrying, the ceremony of a marriage, the exchanging of vows, the covenant agreement. That’s what marriage is. Interesting, marry - to wed, to unite a man and woman in wedlock, it’s the uniting process, it’s not the going to bed process on the honeymoon. It’s the actual uniting, the wedding, the wedding feast, the nuptials, the contract, the oaths.
WED: To take a spouse, to marry, to perform the marriage CEREMONY.
MATRIMONY: ‘The act of being married; marriage.’ Used but one time in the NT and that’s Heb 13:4 “Marriage (matrimony) is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled…”
It’s talking about the actual institution of marriage, when you go pass the actual ceremony and you come to the bed. In other words going to bed with your wife is to be honored, it is not something to be thought of as being a dirty or defiled thing. But that is the only time that matrimony or you could put the word marriage in there, but it’s really talking about the state of marriage and maybe matrimony fit’s a little better.
ESPOUSED: Betrothed - a promise to GIVE in marriage or TO marry - nuptials, exchange vows, covenant. Espousal was as legally binding as marriage, being confirmed by ’oaths,’ with a friend or legal representative by her parents.
When you look at all the words with an open mind and just let the scripture speak, there is no contradiction, these things are all in perfect harmony.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Now another thing that was brought up in Michael's post, is about 'deducing' something out of Scripture...
I'd like to point out to anyone else reading now or in the future that some things in the scriptures must be deduced. There is not chapter and verse on every single detail about anything. I've had to learn--and recently been reminded of that on this very thread.
Here is one place Ray explains that in the 'All Means All' Biblestudy and another place is from the 'Marriage' Biblestudy.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,5605.0.html ---------
DEDUCING SCRIPTURAL TRUTH
I'll give a little example here, because everybody doesn’t know how to deduce something.
If Nazareth is north of Jerusalem and Bethlehem is south of Jerusalem, we can ‘deduce’ that Bethlehem is also south of Nazareth, even though we don’t have a Bible verse that tells us that. You deduce it. It’s got to be, because if up here is Nazareth and down here is Bethlehem, Nazareth is north of Jerusalem. Then Bethlehem must also be south of Nazareth. That’s a deduction and you don’t have an actual statement, but you deduce it and it is factual truth. I mean that’s how scientist figure out lots of things, how to deduce it by something else.
Notice what it says in this verse.
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
I want to get us out of every old mind set. In your old mind set, most will look at that verse and what will be the proof that all will be saved? He is going to bring ‘all’ to repentance. But that’s the word pas, which can mean many. But don’t give up on this verse so quickly, there is more to it. Let’s put a little deduction to work here.
I’m going to go and take the most difficult scenario first, of how to prove these things. From here they will get simpler.
So "the Lord is
not," that word ou. Now we just established that it (not) always means, no - not - any - never, with no exception, right. Because if there is as exception then you can get into the kingdom of God without doing the will of the Father, if there is one exception. So this word ‘ou’ means absolutely none. Now let’s read it with the salvation of people in mind.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not (Gk. #3856 ou - no, not, nay, never ever, none, zero)
slack concerning His promise (so is there any slackness at all in God‘s promises? No, not at all, none),
as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not (Gk. #3361 - mē, not, any, neither, never, no, none, nor, nothing)
willing (Gk. #1014 bulimia, there is no slackness that God is not in any way willing, disposed, minded or intended)
that any (Gk. #5100 tis - some, any, a, any {thing, thing at all}, certain, divers, every, man, one, ought, some {man, body, thing, what} no thing. So how many is God willing or intending are going to perish? This is talking about our destiny, not in this life time. How many? Not even one, zero, not some, not any, not at all any)
should perish (Gk. apollumi - perish, destroy, lose)
but that all (Gk. Pas - all, as many as. We can take that out, forget the word all, you don‘t need it. Put ‘that they,’ who? Anybody who doesn’t come under the category of none)
should come to repentance.
Are you following this? This is all based on the negative. How many that don’t come under the category of none, not any, not any man, not any woman, not any thing, none whatsoever, nothing. Now if you are not in that category, you are going to come to repentance and not have a destiny of perishing or perished - apollumi. How many is that? Everyone does not come under the mē, the none, so it includes everyone. Therefore the “all” in that verse is everyone who is not included in the “any,” and that’s EVERYONE!
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,5675.0.html ---------------
Mat 5:31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
v. 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced commits adultery.
So Jesus did not even contradict the aspect of divorce, you know when they came to Him and said, can a man divorce for any reason. He said that if you put away your wife or divorced her, except it be for a cause of fornication or immorality - ‘porneia’ is the word, then you cause that person, if they go out and find another mate, then you cause them to commit adultery. You had no right to divorce that person.
Now He doesn’t say it specifically, but you can deduce, you know you can lawfully, legally and rightly deduce from what is said, something that isn’t said. If you shouldn’t divorce for that, “except for fornication,” that means for fornication, you can divorce. So if Jesus Christ is putting His approval on a certain aspect of immorality where divorce can be involved, than He is also backing up the fact, that it was a legal marriage until the divorce came about.
Jesus does not contradict divorcement. If adultery is involved, Jesus okays the marriage of a divorced person.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
So hope this is helpful and will kind of cap things off for this thread.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
Author
Topic: Kingdom of God - of the heavens (Read 23794 times)