|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 0:57:14 GMT -5
From: Suhndog (Original Message) Sent: 9/28/2003 8:06 PM
Hi All..
Marc, here..
When I finally was set free from all the condemnation and guilt regarding
being gay and a Messianic Jew, I was SO thrilled! The Word became alive for
the first time for me! I was SO excited! I immediately did a very thorough
study on 1Sam. 20:41 .. Some people 'wonder' if this verse describes 'just'
a 'friendly' encounter between Dave and Jon.. well, the Hebrew is VERY
revealing! Example: to kiss in Hebrew here is 'NASAK' the literal meaning
is: to burn or kindle... AND it means to 'fasten up'.. If someone were to
give a 'burning, kindling' kiss.. that is definately a HOT kiss, and not
just a 'peck' on the cheek. Plus, to fasten up.. Whoa! We are talking about
one wholloping, gully-washer of a kiss! There are also the connotations of
intimacy along with this in the literal Hebrew. Then comes the end of the
verse.. I spent ALOT of time on this, the Hebrew literally means 'until
David became enlarged' or 'consummated greatly'. Hmm, sounds kinda like
someone was having an erection.. and/or climax.. But even if anyone wanted
to dispute this.. when you read ALL of Jon and David's story, it is (I
think) the most wonderful, tender, passionate love stories I've ever read..
Everything from David's matchless mercy towards Saul (the cave situation
where David spared Saul's life, etc) to the amazing love that David showed
Jon by raising his kin (and not killing them as should have happened to
'protect' the throne..etc) . I cry everytime I read the 'story'.. Back to
the Hebrew: 'until David Exceeded' is what the KJV says.. the word in Hebrew
for 'exceeded' is HIGDYL (phoenetic) Not Ha Gadal. Ha Gadal could mean alot
of non-sexual things, but the real word is HIGDYL which only means: became
enlarged, or consummated greatly. It's always best to read the Word
'altogether' and not isolate 'pet' (or otherwise) scriptures.. One must
always get the entire context.. otherwise you could end up creating your own
doctrines, etc.. (naughty!) Not to mention you could 'over-scrutinize' and
miss what the Holy Spirit wants you to see. The letter killeth, but the
Spirit giveth life!!! Amen.. Just some thoughts... (^_^)
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 0:57:31 GMT -5
From: Cantor Sent: 10/3/2003 5:15 AM
I don't think you've read the bible enough. Every time someone in the bible is falling away from God, they end up having multiple partners/wives. David, Solomon and others were both warned about living amongst and marrying non-Jews, but they did not listen.
God Speaks, we listen? That's what a healthy prayer life is all about.
Cantor
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 0:57:48 GMT -5
From: JayDWhite Sent: 10/3/2003 9:46 AM
Cantor:
Polygamy has never worked in societies where there was any form of class. Let's speak plainly, all past examples of polygamy have been in societies that viewed women as, at best, second class citzens or, at worse, property.
It is possible that a polygamous marriage could work if all members were viewed, and treated, as equals.
Jay
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 0:58:02 GMT -5
From: JayDWhite Sent: 10/3/2003 9:53 AM
Post#26:
Cantor:
Forgive me but it seems you are getting cause and affect, if there actually is any connection, reversed. But I could be misreading your post.
You said: "Every time someone in the bible is falling away from God, they end up having multiple partners/wives." This seems to imply the "falling away" caused the polygamous marraige. But, unless I misunderstanding scripture, the polygamous marriage was just a "setting" and not the cause, it was that some of the wives were non-Christian and it was this that caused the problem. You did provide: "David, Solomon and others were both warned about living amongst and marrying non-Jews, but they did not listen." which points to this concept. It should be noted that a mongamous marriage to a non-Christian could easily have this same problem.
This: "God Speaks, we listen? That's what a healthy prayer life is all about", if properly applied, could have even rendered David's and Solomon's problems nonexistent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 0:58:55 GMT -5
From: Fence_sitter_guy Sent: 10/3/2003 11:49 AM
To live with just one of them is pointless to me.
If I marry a woman, the Bible says it's my
responsibility to provide for her and basically
satisfy her every whim--and like I said, I don't want
any children *snickers*. As for a man... He'd most
likely get bored, because my sex drive isn't a 24/7
thing... (and I want a man who wants sex more than I
do, mind you--I guess I'm a "fag" because when it
comes to men, I look for masculinity/straight-acting
characteristics--two sexually feminine men together is
a pointless coupling, unless both feminine men in the
couple seeked other feminine men from the start--but
that's just not me). I don't know--it's hard to see
myself with a man as my lover if it's just us. I can't
see myself in a "gay" relationship. I guess God wants
me to live alone. I don't mind then, if He does--I
guess my motto is "**** the world, and watch your own
back"
Joey
P.S. thanks for your advice by the way...
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 0:59:41 GMT -5
From: Fence_sitter_guy Sent: 10/3/2003 11:51 AM
Do you consider a trio to be polygamy...? *shy
smile* ...guess so... I guess there's no point in why
God made me bi then...
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:00:07 GMT -5
From: Fence_sitter_guy Sent: 10/3/2003 11:57 AM
--- Cantor <staghorn521@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't think you've read the bible enough. Every
> time someone in the bible is falling away from God,
> they end up having multiple partners/wives. David,
> Solomon and others were both warned about living
> amongst and marrying non-Jews, but they did not
> listen.
I remember God punished David by killing that
baby he had with Bathsheeba (which I don't get, if he
loved Jonathon--the dude was either bi, or a confused
player)--but did David ever have any children with
that woman he took as his wife (when Saul and his men
were chasing him, and they met that couple with the
timid wife and the nasty rude husband that God struck
dead for being so mean and nasty)? If so, did God
punish David for having any kids with her, if he ever
had any (while else marry back then?). I've read my
bible 3 times, but through and through from start to
finish--and everytime I've read the David stories, I
always felt God had a special favor toward him..
Joey
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:00:30 GMT -5
From: Manager Rev. Jim Sent: 10/3/2003 4:18 PM
Amen, Jay.
In fact, the Bible specifically states the God GAVE David his multiple spouses, and in the Old Covenant law there is a specific provision for handling multiple spouses. There has always been a "loophole" in the Law permitting royalty to have multiple spouses because this was to ensure the continuance of the king's blood (offspring) on the throne.
While I am personally not particularly in support of polygamy because of its disasterous results for every single polygamist in the Bible and other reasons (see our section "Gays&Marriage" for details on that) , it cannot be argued that polygamy is a RESULT of sin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:00:53 GMT -5
From: JayDWhite Sent: 10/3/2003 5:59 PM
Rev Jim:
Thank you!
Jay
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:01:07 GMT -5
From: Cantor Sent: 10/4/2003 6:37 AM
Is there no point in why God created some people bisexual, others homosexual, others diabetics, others with deformaties, etc. etc.?
Of course there is a point. Our weaknesses are not his creation, but a result of the fall of mankind in Eden. God allowed choice, and allowed satan to fall from grace. Everything happens that God may be needed and glorified.
If there were no problems or sins in life, why would God's creation need Him? Could God have a loving relationship and connection with children who were perfectly in His image? I believe that God created us, knowing we would fall, and that the Tree of Life (Christ's redemption) and the Tree of the Knowlege of Good and evil (God's agape Love) were all part of that plan.
Cantor
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:01:25 GMT -5
From: Cantor Sent: 10/4/2003 7:08 AM
Our Site Manager wrote: "It cannot be argued that polygamy is a RESULT of sin."
Beware of the "can of worms" you are opening with this statement. Allowing polygamy for the purpose of preserving the line of descendants to Christ will now be used as a justification for polygamy today? That's how I read your post. Maybe I'm confused (I am blonde).
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:01:48 GMT -5
From: Manager Rev. Jim Sent: 10/4/2003 12:05 PM
Cantor,
With all due respect to your views, I for one would not and could not ever trust or love a god who intentionally plotted our downfall and then threatened to send us to eternal damnation for it if we don't bow to his whim. That would be an absolute abuse of power and authority.
Man was created with a free will because man is made in God's image and GOD has a free will. One of the differences between God and Adam was that God had ALL KNOWLEDGE, but Adam did not. Adam did not know good from evil, therefore, being in ignorance, he and his wife were easily deceived. It was not God's will that man should disobey. Adam broke God's trust (and broke God's heart) by defying Him, thereby bringing death into the world. God Himself said that it is NOT His will that man should perish. God gave man His Laws and gave up His only Son to RESCUE us from our own stupidity.
You asked, "Could God have a loving relationship and connection with children who were perfectly in His image?", and then you go on to explain why He could not. However, you may have forgotten that the point of Christ's first coming and His future return is to establish His kingdom for eternity, restoring man to his previous perfection to dwell with Him forever. No man in his present state can dwell with God. God is perfection and only perfection can dwell with God. Is it not written that we shall be CHANGED in the twinkling of an eye and this mortal shall put on immortality and this corruptible shall put on incorruption, and that we shall be LIKE HIM?
We, as the Bride of Christ, will be MADE ONE with Him, as a husband and wife together ARE ONE, for eternity. That cannot happen unless we are made perfect like Him, as it is clearly written. God did not put the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the garden in order to tempt Man (as it is written that we are NEVER to say that God tempts man). God put the tree in the garden because He so wished it, and He commanded Adam not to touch it because it belonged to HIM and not Adam. A father does not have to explain himself to his child. A father gives his command and the reason for the command is "Because I said so"! I am appauled that so many people feel that the Almighty God, Creator of the Universe and all that is in it, needs to constantly explain Himself. It is written that "the secret things belong unto our God, but THAT WHICH IS KNOWN belongs to us and our children". The information that God has not provided to us belongs TO HIM. What, are we to expect God to give us MORE information when we can't even handle what He has already given (that is, His Word in the Scriptures)? Let God be God.
Adam was given only one law, and by HIS OWN FREE WILL he broke it. Think of Jesus' words in the garden of gethsemane (sp?), where He pleaded with the Father in agony until blood was actually sweating from his head, begging on His knees three times that He would not have to go through with the horrible death that awaited Him for our sakes. Are we then to believe that He PLOTTED all this from the beginning? It is true that God KNEW from the beginning what would happen, but it was certainly not what He WANTED to happen - and He made this abundantly clear to Adam from the beginning.
The reason God spared Lucifer in the beginning was not because He wanted to use him as some pawn to test man. There is a reason God did not destroy Lucifer in the beginning, when he sinned. The Bible tells us that Lucifer, a mere created thing, declared himself to be greater than God, professing to the angels that God was a tyrant. He convinced 1/3 of all the angels with his lies. Had God destroyed Lucifer at that time, then all of the created realm would have to agree with Lucifer that God truly is a tyrant and that He'd zap you dead if you questioned anything. God is NOT a tyrant. He wants His creation to observe Him because He deserves it, not because He beat it out of us. Lucifer role in man's fall was his RETALIATION against God - if he could hurt God's bride, hurt His image, he knew he would hurt God THROUGH US by making US betray Him.
But as it is so clearly written throughout the context of the Bible, God has ALLOWED (not caused) all of this to continue SO THAT, at the end, all creation will see that Lucifer was wrong and God was right. God is letting man live the way he wants, letting them follow their father Lucifer, so that all creation sees that it is utterly unable to save itself and that it can do nothing of its own self. And it is written that when judgment commences, all creation will look upon Lucifer and say, "Is THIS the one that caused the nations to tremble?", was it this little beast of a worm that caused all this havoc and destruction and blasphemy, which brought about the death of the Lord God Himself for our sakes?!
No, my friend. God had no hand in our corruption. That was our own free choice, which we abused. We brought death, all on our own, by choosing to listen to Lucifer instead of trusting God - just like the third of angels. God has done nothing but be a merciful King.
In Christ's love,
Rev. Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:02:16 GMT -5
From: Manager Rev. Jim Sent: 10/4/2003 12:12 PM
Cantor,
My friend, you indeed read my post wrongly. I am OPPOSED to polygamy, as anyone can clearly see by the section "Gays & Marriage" that I have had posted on the site for quite some time. It is destructive, as was proved by every case of polygamy in the Bible. My argument was that, sin doesn't CAUSE polygamy, as someone implied. However, grave sins CAN occur BECAUSE OF polygamy. That is all I said.
In Christ,
Rev. Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:02:28 GMT -5
From: jan Sent: 10/4/2003 1:26 PM
Jim, your knowledge of scripture, pure purpose and clear articulation of the
Word's Truth continue to bless and astound me. Blessings in Christ....and
thank-you...j
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:02:56 GMT -5
From: Cantor Sent: 10/4/2003 9:57 PM
Reverend,
Our church body teaches that in Genesis, the Triune God (Creator, Savior, and Spirit) says to its self, "Let us create man in OUR image". Therefore, all three aspects of the future life of the church were founded "in the beginning" (including a need to redeem the impending fall of man). This theological reasoning was the basis for my comments. You don't have to agree with this interpretation of scripture. How we were created is not as important as why we are saved, and not worth a huge theological debate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Jim Cunningham on Nov 19, 2008 1:03:24 GMT -5
From: Manager Rev. Jim Sent: 10/5/2003 8:06 AM
Cantor,
Actually, how and why we were created is at the heart of why we must be saved. The Word of God stands as one piece of work, from Genesis to Revelation. Where we are going is a RESULT of where we have come from, therefore to ignore the beginning in order to focus only on the ending leads to falsehood, blindness and spiritual ignorance. I'm sorry to disappoint you on this point but Biblical doctrine and authority supercedes the doctrine of any church authority, hence I must stand upon what God has said and not what a church has said.
In Christ,
Rev. Jim
|
|
