Posted on 10/26/2014 8:08:35 AM PDT by GonzoII
The shaming at the gate happened when the man refused to enter into the covenant of marriage. Onan entered into the marriage, but refused to carry through.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiachWhat is being discussed in all of chapter 38 ?
Chapter 38 seems to be about "can the will of man
interfere with the Patrilineal bloodline of Yah'shua".Judah is the tribe of the first-born of Israel by assignment.
Judah has three sons.
The first(Er) displeases YHvH and is struck dead.
Onan(2nd) through the sin of PRIDE refuses to offer
his seed to Er for progeny for Judah
(levitical marriage)
He directly refuses to obey YHvH's Commandments.
Judah then told Tamar to wait for Shelah grew up.Judah feared the third son would also be struck dead.
Judah failed to obey YHvH and to give Shelah to Tamar for an heir.Tamar removed her widow's garments dressed herself
as a harlot to obey YHvH and produce an heir for Judah.Thus continued the Bloodline to Yah'shua.
Which was being disrupted by haSatan and his sin of PRIDE in Onan.
Exactly. The morality of contraception can be argued but not on the case of Onan.
Oh, I wasn’t criticizing you riding in a car with a Unitarian. I just wanted to make clear you were not confusing those people with Protestants. They deny the Trinity and declare that everyone is going to heaven. They are enemies of all Christianity.
Then do that. But don't declare something not clearly defined in scripture on the misapplication of one verse.
Did Onan perform withdrawal from his brother’s wife, or was he busy loping his pony prior to the act?
True, the Pill was a bomb that silently but negatively revolutionized society, producing selfish couples and spoiled selfish overprotected 1.8 children - and which are outnumbered by pets 4 to one. If you are going to be married, exercise temperance but have all the children God gives, practicing Mt. 6:33 to see needs met, while instilling sacrificial love and sharing and community.
The political ramifications of the Pill by conservative Christians has been to reduce their numbers in a changing demographic that will make it much more difficult for the few children they have.
Related:
A new report concludes that children growing up in large families are happier and more successful. Told you so, says mother-of-five Cassandra Jardine. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3356892/The-bigger-the-family-the-better-says-Cassandra-Jardine.html
That length of time polemic is weak. The concept and practice of "queen of heaven" goes back to Babylon in the Old Testament. That certainly doesn't make it right for Christians.
The punishment in Jewish law was public mockery. Not death. The fact that they went in graphic detail how he refused his duties shows it wasn't just the refusal that caused his death.
Deuteronomy 25:8-10 8 And they shall cause him to be sent for forthwith, and shall ask him. If he answer: I will not take her to wife: 9 The woman shall come to him before the ancients, and shall take off his shoe from his foot, and spit in his face, and say: So shall it be done to the man that will not build up his brother's house: 10 And his name shall be called in Israel, the house of the unshod.
This occurs in Genesis, Fascinating! But a total non-sequitur.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
which in my Tanach occurs
before Deuteronomy
in both time and space.
Sex is the very definition of marriage….there are many types of relationships that exist amongst humans but only one that has sex as the distinguishing feature and that’s the sexual relationship between a husband and a wife. God created mankind with the intrinsic desire to have sex as a natural element that is woven right into the fabric of our physical, mental and emotional characters. He did not create sex to be a vehicle by which we could all be condemned because of desiring after something that is prohibited…he did not create humans to live lives which are filled with aching and long for something that is unattainable and thus we would have to exist in a constant state of self-denial. He created sex for a pure and perfect purpose…. to set the foundation of the institution of marriage itself which becomes the vehicle by which sex moved from the realm of being something that is absolutely prohibited to the realm of not only being encouraged, it’s completely mandated. If you don’t believe this (or you believe that somehow it’s only for the purpose of having children), take a look at the great marriage chapter which is 1 Corinthians 7:
1. Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. It is explained elsewhere in scripture that if a man does not feel the need to have a wife, this is a good thing because he does not have additional burdens to deal with when conducting ministry.
2. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.This verse simply recognizes the nature of humanity is sexual and it is normal that we desire sex physically because God created us that way…. and marriage is the institution which God also has created so that sex can happen in a God approved way.
3. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.The sexual act as the defining characteristic of marriage is to be given by the husband and wife to each other freely as an obligation that is loving in nature.
4. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.The mandate to have sex in marriage is so great that if either the husband or the wife wants to engage the other sexually, the other meets that need willingly and without reservation.
5. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. As if to drive the point home from verse 4, the mandate for the husband and wife to have sex is so great that it is only superseded IF both the husband and wife mutually agree to take a break and ONLY for the purpose of fasting and prayer. And if one of the parties denies the other sex, it’s called fraud. Why? Because God created that desire for sex to be so strong that regular sex in a marriage strengthens the bonds of the marriage itself while denial of sex in a marriage exposes one or both of the parties to Satanic temptations.
Note that nowhere in this passage are children mentioned…. children are the outcome of sex, not the sole purpose of sex. Sex is the means created by God to establish and solidify the loving relationship between the husband and the wife so that if children are the result, they will be welcomed into a loving family that is doing things God’s way.
As for Onan, he was killed simply because he disobeyed God and God's laws…. and in so doing, he violated the holiness that God ascribes to the sex act between husbands and wives. How exactly was he disobedient? Onan disobeyed God on what ultimately was one of the 10 commandments…….Exodus 20:14 ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery.’ What is adultery? Well, we know that it is having sex with someone other than your husband or wife. Under normal day to day circumstances, a sexual act between Onan and his sister-in-law would be considered to be an adulterous act and absolutely prohibited by the above commandment….. however God in His infinite wisdom had created this one exception to the rule which is explained clearly in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 ……. “5. If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her. 6. And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.” The exception to the rule would appear to be created by God because he wanted the widow to be looked after as well as the name of the dead brother to not simply disappear. And so this exception for sex outside of marriage was not only allowed and created, it was God approved. It was not meant to be interpreted as an exception that could be exploited to avoid falling under the law concerning adultery….... within the bounds of the holiness ascribed to the sexual act, this was simply an allowed exception that fulfilled a specific purpose of God. By ‘spilling his seed on the ground’, Onan disobeyed God and it could be in fact inferred that he thought he was doing an end-run around God’s commandment on adultery. He essentially thought he could commit adultery and get away with it scot-free (and ultimately responsibility-free) by leaving his sister-in-law childless. And by his actions, he mocked God and was killed for it. By perverting God's purpose of the exception, Onan turned it into an act of adultery.
God is holy…. and there are very serious consequences for those who mock Him and discount His holiness in all its forms.
Genesis 38:9-10: “But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother.
On the other hand I do not believe there is any thing wrong with what Onan did except disobey the commandment that was for the purpose of multiplying.
hecticskeptic, I could not have said as good myself, glad some one told it like it is.
Argue contraception all you want. But don’t pervert scripture to do so.
That conclusion is in my view erroneous even though 'contraception' was involved.... In the end, the 'thing that Onan did' was to try to circumvent God's law by thinking that he could get away with adultery by exploiting the one exception that God had allowed. He was essentially punished by death for mocking God.
And did he use this passage of scripture to justify his vasectomy reversal? If so, I think he was sadly ill-informed and mistaken.... if someone can find another passage in scripture that points to a specific statement that "God hates contraception", I'd like to know what it is.
Sounds like one or both people on the make, I have had those kind of conversations with the opposite sex myself and I was on the make.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.