Do It Once

Should a Widow Re-Marry?

The immediate sinful human response to the above question is probably: "Why not?" "Why be lonely and have no new husband to help take care of the kids?" "Besides, it might be fun to get and screw around with a new model."

And, there seems to be some Bible-doctrine approval for such an obscenely-immoral attitude resulting in actual physical actions:

First Corinthians 7:39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband lives. But if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will, but only in the Lord.
First Corinthians 7:40 But in my judgment she is happier if she so remain, and I think also that I have the Spirit of God.

He thinks?

The precise wording of 7:40 above using the phrase " remain...." refers not to her actually getting married to a new husband, but instead so remain at liberty to becoming married to a new husband.

One does not not have to proceed forward at every green stoplight that comes along . . .or does one - so as to not get rightly chastised with the horns of the enraged behind one?

Yet, does not the Holy Spirit through Saint Paul again suggest that widows re-marry in the passage:

Romans 7:1 Do you not know, brethren - for I am speaking to those who know the law - that the law is binding on a person only during his life?
Romans 7:2 Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives; but if her husband dies she is discharged from the law pertaining to the husband.
Romans 7:3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.
Romans 7:4 Likewise, my brethren, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God.

Lest one get the wrong impression that Paul -- with the apostle's arguably-absurd or initially-noxious-and-weird "you-have-died-and-your-life-is-hid," "you've-been-crucified-with-Christ" "you-were-buried-with-Him-in-baptism" "I-can-do-all-things-in-Christ" euphemistic oddities -- that he is equating the necessity for widows to re-marry as much as the need for people to embrace Christ (and vice-versa) . . . he qualifies his pseudo-advocacy for widow remarriage with:

First Timothy 2:11 But refuse younger-women [Gr. ne(o)teras] widows [Gr. ch(e)ras], for whenever they grow lustful against Christ, they desire to marry;
First Timothy 2:12 having guilt because they have thrown off the first faith.

Some might try to justify widows remarrying by citing the case of the widow Ruth the Moabitess found in the Old Testament, whose remarriage to Boaz was assumed justifiable by her being willing to become grafted into the Deity related to the geneological bloodline descendancy of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, culminating with Christ Jesus Himself. And it should be noted that there is no record of Ruth ever becoming pregnant or having children by her first husband, as was the case of there being no record of Bathsheba ever becoming pregnant or having children by Uriah the Hittite, who was her first husband. There is also no record of Michal (or the more-typically feminine: "Michelle" if you wish) who was David's wife, ever becoming pregnant or having children by David, especially after she had become the wife of Paltiel (who she perhaps had had sex with?) after being David's wife and then having returned to David:

Second Samuel 3:7 Now Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah; and Ishbosheth said to Abner, "Why have you gone in to my father's concubine?"
8 Then Abner was very angry over the words of Ishbosheth, and said, "Am I a dog's head of Judah? This day I keep showing loyalty to the house of Saul your father, to his brothers, and to his friends, and have not given you into the hand of David; and yet you charge me today with a fault concerning a woman.
9 God do so to Abner, and more also, if I do not accomplish for David what the LORD has sworn to him,
10 to transfer the kingdom from the house of Saul, and set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan to Beersheba."
11 And Ishbosheth could not answer Abner another word, because he feared him.
12 And Abner sent messengers to David at Hebron, saying, "To whom does the land belong? Make your covenant with me, and hey, my hand shall be with you to bring over all Israel to you."
13 And he said, "Good; I will make a covenant with you; but one thing I require of you; that is, you shall not see my face, unless you first bring Michal, Saul's daughter, when you come to see my face."
14 Then David sent messengers to Ishbosheth Saul's son, saying, "Give me my wife Michal, whom I betrothed at the price of a hundred foreskins of the Philistines."
15 And Ishbosheth sent, and took her from her husband Paltiel the son of Laish.
16 But her husband went with her, weeping after her all the way to Bahurim. Then Abner said to him, "Go, return"; and he returned.

Second Samuel 6:14 And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod. ["Girded?" Interesting.]
15 So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the horn.
16 As the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window, and saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart.
20 And David returned to bless his household. But Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, "How the king of Israel honored himself today, uncovering himself today before the eyes of his servants' maids, as one of the vulgar fellows shamelessly uncovers himself!"
21 And David said to Michal, "It was before the LORD, who chose me above your father, and above all his house, to appoint me as prince over Israel, the people of the LORD--and I will make merry before the LORD.
22 I will make myself yet more contemptible than this, and I will be abased in your eyes; but by the maids of whom you have spoken, by them I shall be held in honor."
23 And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death. [Just and understandable frigidity here - with no "domestic abuse."]

Certain apostates have even gone so far, in further confusing the issue of widows remarrying, as to heretically mistranslate the vital anti-masseuse/escort-prostitution Scripture verse of First Timothy 5:14 using the dishonest excuse of alleged contextual continuity to impose the incorrect words: "younger widows"in place of the correct words: "younger women [Gr. ne(o)teras] -- no thanks to certain willfully-or-innocently-ignorant accomplice lexicographers somewhat misnamed "scholars.".

But death of either spouse (or whichever spouse in a harem-type polygamous situation) is NOT equivalent to automatic divorce. "What GOD has joined together, let NO human pull apart."

The extra-biblical axiom, (not found anywhere in the Bible), of: "...till death do us part" certainly does NOT mean "....till death does us divorce."

WILL resurrected spouses continue to be in a state of marriage with each other in Heaven?

Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in Heaven.
Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but they are as the angels in Heaven.
Luke 20:35 . . . but they who shall be counted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.

WHY did Christ state that exactly with the precise wording He did? WHY did He simply not say (or add) that "...they neither marry, nor continue to be married if they had already been married, nor are given in marriage?

He did NOT say that when married people get to Heaven they are automatically in a divorced marital status, and pertaining to the sexuality (or non-sexual non-genderness or sterility) of angels in Heaven(?), not much is known, except them being clothed in long white robes:

Mark 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were frightened.

No legs-baring miniskirts . . . although:

Hebrews 4:13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.

Sounds like Paradise restored, as before The Fall? Better than TSA see-through scanners and stripshow fondlers at airports.

Whatever the case, there is the blessed example of Anna the prophetess, who thankfully did not "violate her first pledge" (refer again to First Timothy 2:12) by remarrying:

Luke 2:36 And there was a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was advanced in many days, and had lived with a husband seven years from her virginity.
Luke 2:37 And she was a widow of eighty-four years, who did not depart from the temple, serving God with fastings and prayers night and day.

The best example of marital-status chastity and fidelity was the Virgin Mary, who - contrary to heretic mistranslation against Luke 1:34, did NOT say: "How can this be, since I have no husband?" NOR say: "How can this be, since I am a virgin?"

Mary in fact did have a husband, of sorts, by being engaged ("betrothed") to Joseph, so no insinuations nor inferences of incapacity to copulate can legitimately be drawn from that. Nor is it allowable to substitute the word: "virgin" for presumed inability to commit fornication after being spoken to by Gabriel.

Similar wrong-word presumptions has occurred in the case of the anti-polygamous wrong rendition of:

First Timothy 3:2 Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher
First Timothy 3:12 Let deacons be the husband of one wife, and let them manage their children and their households well . . .

. . . by the deviantly-demented heretics errantly (likely at the behest of sexist feminists) instead imposing the errant words: "married only once" (being that the Greek Text the Greek word for married is definitely not found in the Greek Text of that passage, whereas the Greek word for husband [andra] is found in First Timothy 3:2.

Getting back to Luke 1:34, the correct reading is instead: "How can this be, since I know not a man" -- which definitely implies that she was not having coital copulation when being spoken to by Gabriel, nor having done coitus previously before being spoken to by Gabriel, nor intending to immediately do so right after the angelic communique was completed.

So, was Mary forced to have the privacy of her body invaded by the Holy Spirit in such an "intrusive," quasi-rape-like, "disruptively embarrassing," intimate sexually-oriented way? 'Keep Your Laws off My Body?'

No, because she had previously given herself completely to the Lord anyway, according to her personal history on Scriptural record. NOR was she forced to become impregnated by the Holy Spirit (she could have prevented that, perhaps), and she might even have been able to induce abortion homicide after becoming aware that she was pregnant.

That is significant, because cultic religions typically force their beliefs on others with even death threats, let alone verbally or physically abusive persecution. Good thing our American founding fathers did not force a denominational State religion on everyone as indicated not by the so-called/errantly-misnamed: "Establishment Clause," but instead by the correctly-termed "Anti-Establishment/Non-Prohibition Clause" (of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution) -- contrary to the situation they had had in England under King George.

Along those lines, I recently heard someone state that God will force everyone to confess Jesus as their Lord and bow to Him:

Isaiah 45:23 By Myself I have sworn, from My mouth has gone forth in righteousness a word that shall not return: 'To Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'
Romans 14:11 for it is written, "As I live," says the Lord, "every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall give praise to God."

Whether they like it or not?

Not entirely.

God has His ways - like humans involuntarily breathing, urinating and defecating, sleeping, etc. depending upon the natural circumstances. Who knows what even diehard atheists will say when they are almost catatonically awestruck and overwhelmed by the mighty majesty of the gloriously-appearing Christ in cataclysmic power and might?


Philippians 2:10 . . . that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, Philippians 2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. "Should? instead of shall!

True, physical force will be used, both temporally and eternally, by the Lord enforcing His words and will on everyone - like a policeman physically taking a prostate peace-disturbing protestor away after cuffing her:

First Kings 18:40 And Elijah said to them, "Seize the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape." And they seized them; and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and killed them there.

Matthew 13:41 The Son of man will send His angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers,
Matthew 13:42 and throw them into the furnace of fire; there humans will weep and gnash their teeth.

But, although the Son of God came to serve:

Matthew 20:26 It shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant,
Matthew 20:27 and whoever would be first among you must be your slave.

Mark 9:35 And he sat down and called the twelve; and he said to them, "If any one would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all."
Mark 10:43 But it shall not be so among you; but whoever would be great among you must be your servant
Mark 10:44 and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all.

. . .must God the Father ALSO be a slave of all? MUST God the Father be the servant of humans to be considered 'great?' If so, why does not God the Father get His so-called and alleged passive and subservient ars off His High and Mighty Throne and grovel down in the dirt before us humans ready to then kick and pee on Him?

WHO is the Boss when it comes right down to it? WHO is in charge?

John 13:13 You call Me the Teacher, and Lord, and you say well, for I am.
14 If then I, the Lord and the Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet (or at least tie their loose shoelaces).
15 For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you.
16 Truly, truly, I say to you, A servant is not greater than his master, neither is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.

Funny that He did NOT instead say: 'A master is not greater than his servant." Is not self-esteem at stake? Self-aggrandizing egotism selfishly striving to seek attention for ambitious self-promotional self-importance? Is there a conspicuous lack of humility? A violating of non-discrimination, diversity, and inclusiveness statutes? All in the deceptively-fabricated and weaselword/satanspeak-concocted names of "equal" and "civil" "rights?"

Should the electorate compensate for "the" "disabled," "disadvantaged," and "handicapped" by letting the dishonestly-sneaky and belligerently-mouthy niggar from Mombasa Kenya get away with it, for the sake of black reparations due wilfully-imported dark-pigmented slave ancestors on room-and-board-provided minimum-wage southern plantations after the non-civil "Civil" War?

Leviticus 21:10 The priest who is chief among his brethren (take the Catholic Pope, for example), upon whose head the anointing oil is poured, and who has been consecrated to wear the garments, shall not let the hair of his head hang loose, nor rend his clothes;
11 he shall not go in to any dead body, nor defile himself, even for his father or for his mother;
12 neither shall he go out of the sanctuary, nor profane the sanctuary of his God; for the consecration of the anointing oil of his God is upon him: I am the LORD.
13 And he shall take a wife in her virginity. [whether or not she's Italien and resides in the Vatican]
14 A widow, or one divorced, or a woman who has been defiled, or a harlot, these he shall not marry; but he shall take to wife a virgin of his own people,
15 that he may not profane his children among his people; for I am the LORD who sanctify him.
16 And the LORD said to Moses,
17 "Say to Aaron, 'None of your descendants throughout their generations who has a blemish may approach to offer the bread of his God.
18 For no one who has a blemish shall draw near, a man blind or lame, or one who has a mutilated face or a limb too long,
19 or a man who has an injured foot or an injured hand,
20 or a hunchback, or a dwarf, or a man with a defect in his sight or an itching disease or scabs or crushed testicles;
21 no man of the descendants of Aaron the priest who has a blemish shall come near to offer the LORD's offerings by fire; since he has a blemish, he shall not come near to offer the bread of his God.
22 He may eat the bread of his God, both of the most holy and of the holy things,
23 but he shall not come near the veil or approach the altar, because he has a blemish, that he may not profane My sanctuaries; for I am the LORD who sanctify them.' "

At least Newt Gingrich (and Rick Perry) hate homogays and abortionists (not merely their sin(s) - because obviously sins alone minus the impenitent sinners who sin and/or continue in sin - are not going to burn in Hell forever), plus both guys are not physically deformed - in contrast to war-injured McCain diabolically and senselessly coupled with inferior-gender feminist Palin, in partial contrast to the prettiest and shapeliest non-handicapped Miss-American pageanteresses certainly reflecting the precepts of Leviticus 21.

A little discretion is in order, for the sake of sassy-slander infidel subversives bellering out buzzword rants of rapid-fire non-substantiated objections as vile and despicably-wicked non-patriotic traitors.

Why not? Sounds like a plan:

Proverbs 14:7 Leave the presence of a fool, for there you do not meet words of knowledge.
Proverbs 20:19 He who goes about gossiping reveals secrets; therefore do not associate with one who speaks foolishly.

Second Corinthians 6:17 Therefore come out from them, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch nothing unclean; then I will welcome you.

Ephesians 5:7 Therefore do not associate with them.

Second Timothy 2:16 Avoid such godless chatter, for it will lead people into more and more godlessness,
Second Timothy 3:5 holding the form of religion but denying the power of it. Avoid such people.